On Friday, 5 June 2015 at 22:07:48 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
On 5 Jun 2015 20:55, "Bruno Medeiros via Digitalmars-d" <
[email protected]> wrote:
On 29/05/2015 19:35, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:
[...]
>This isn't the first time I've seen this, in basically
>every benchmark
>featuring D I have to submit a patch/make a comment that
>dmd shouldn't
>be used. Make no mistake, this is damaging to D's
>reputation - how
>well does D's "native efficiency" go over when people are
>saying it's
>slower than Scala and F#(mono)?
>
>LDC and GDC need promoted more.
[...]
This will probably offend some people, but I think LDC/GDC
should be the
default download on dlang.org, and dmd should be provided as
an
alternative for those who want the latest language version
and don't
mind the speed compromise.
It should be more than just LDC/GDC being the default download
on
dlang.org, the DM backend and related toolchain should be
phased out
altogether in favor of LLVM.
Walter might have written great compiler tools in the 90s or
so, but in
today's internet and FOSS online-collaborative era, how can the
Digital
Mars toolchain hope to compete with toolchains having teams of
multiple
full-time developers working on it? (plus a plethora of
occasional
volunteer contributors). The difference in manpower and
resources is
astonishing! And it's only gonna get bigger since LLVM is
having more and
more people and companies supporting it. By this rate, it may
well one day
make even GCC old and obsolete, left to be used by FSF zealots
only.
At the risk of speaking with lack of foresight, are you on the
gcc mailing
list too? If not, get on it. Otherwise you will enter this kind
of
polarised view of X will dominate all.
Slightly off topic, but I recently started digging into GDC( on
your personal fork, anyways.) I find the code pleasantly easy to
navigate and understand. I don't think I've given gdc its due
credit in this thead.
Bye,
