On Tuesday, 15 November 2016 at 15:33:30 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote:
On Tuesday, 15 November 2016 at 15:28:14 UTC, ketmar wrote:
if it will be independent utility -- yes. dmdfe part -- no.
It would relay on the parser of the dmdfe, and parts of dmd's
semantic analysis.
DMD will be much nicer to work with the facility envision.
As I see it there is little reason for writing yet another D
parser.
the more features dmdfe will get, the slower (and more
memory-hungry) it will become. so i don't want any fancy (and
even useful ;-) features in dmd itself (that's what i meant when
i wrote "dmdfe"). if it will be separate app based on dmdfe --
sure, it would be great!
