Am Tue, 18 Oct 2016 16:02:28 -0700
schrieb Ali Çehreli <>:

> I have a friend who has started writing a library in D.
> Although I recommended that he should use a recent dmd or ldc, he thinks 
> gdc is a better candidate because it's "available to the masses" through 
> Linux distros similar to how gcc is. Although he has a good point, the 
> gdc that came with his distro does not even support @nogc.
> Thoughts? Can you please tell him to change his mind! :p
> Ali

If he is starting right *now*, missing fixes or language
enhancements will cause confusion when he asks questions on
the newsgroup or on IRC. (But he has you for that, right?)

Back in the days I would have opted for GDC, too. It didn't
lag far behind and I had hopes that it would get merged into
GCC for good, meaning it would become the de facto D compiler
on GNU systems.

Nowadays I also see the large version gap and that it still
hasn't been merged into mainline GCC. On the other hand LDC
subjectively offers a couple more D specific enhancements,
like turning GC allocations into stack allocations in trivial
cases or the long list of compiler flags. Also with the
backend being a library it is more flexible in the context of
updating the front-end independently from the backend, which
fits Dlang's development cycle better IMO.

I'd say start with DMD, as it comes practically free of
dependencies and is the fastest compiler, which may be the
most useful aspect when you start to learn the language and
need to iterate often.


Reply via email to