On 24/12/2016 3:14 AM, Russel Winder via Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Wed, 2016-12-21 at 15:49 -0800, Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
[…]
Anyone who wants to use ldc can use ldc. It doesn't need to be the
reference
compiler for that. And unlike gdc, it's actually pretty close to dmd.
So,
there should be no problem with folks using ldc for production right
now if
they want to.
Strikes me that the really obvious thing to say is that DMD is the
playground where whoever wants to can play with and progress the D
front end in the knowledge that no-one is going to use DMD in
production. People use LDC in production because it is the right thing
to do: stable proven front end, stable proven backend, and yet up to
date.
What is not to like here? What is the problem here?
Except dmd's backend is far more well proven then LLVM is.
So that argument needs to be tweaked a little bit.
