On Friday, 28 August 2015 at 01:42:22 UTC, Daniel Murphy wrote:
"John Colvin" wrote in message
news:qlbnpjnizwpslrdpk...@forum.dlang.org...
I think he's saying that the argument: "Don't work on DMD
because it's already far behind" could have been applied to
working on LLVM when it was far behind GCC. I don't agree,
but I think that's what he means.
It helps that LLVM has a superior license.
+ LLVM started as an academic research project in compiler
design, so it was never far behind conceptually...
