On 03.11.2015 15:50, Iain Buclaw via Digitalmars-d wrote:
Well, how would that work? :-) What you've probably misheard is half of a phrase. Moving to towards ddmd is not to be confused with moving towards a shared 'frontend' codebase, and is the first half of the correct sentence. The second half is that even then, that has no guarantee of keeping things in sync without also integrating other 'ends' into the CI process. This requires that we set-up an infrastructure where: - New PRs are tested against all compilers before merging. This not to be confused with our current set-up where all compilers build DMD. Specifically new changes upstream must: 1. Be able to apply the change cleanly in their local repositories 2. Build themselves without error. - We then need another process in place to keep each end in sync after changes upstream are applied. It was hoped that moving towards ddmd would force a lot of the ABI-specific code to be moved into Target or Port (host) interfaces that are agnostic to the backend. There are still many target-specific areas where this is not the case, and on top of that there are regressions in the host-specific interfaces. In short, there will always be a heavy maintenance burden regardless of what language we're written in. :-) Iain
I see. Thank you for your answer!
