Hi, still you don't convice me.
So what language features has C that are missing from D and prevent a linker to be written in D? The issue is not if I can beat Walter, the issue is that we have a language which on its official home page states lots of reasons for using it instead of C and C++, and its creator decides to use C when porting the linker to an high level language. So doesn't Walter belive in its own language? As for your challenge, actually I am looking for a job currently, how much can I ask for? -- Paulo "Gary Whatmore" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:[email protected]... > Paulo Pinto Wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I am sorry, but I don't belive it. >> >> Many other systems programming languages that atempted to displace C and >> C++, have >> the toolchain built in its languages, after the compilers were >> bootstrapped, >> as anyone >> with enough compiler knowledge will surely tell you. >> >> And D's linker must first be written in C, to make it easy to rewrite in >> D?! >> >> A linker is not science fiction, it is just a program that binds object >> files and libraries together >> to produce an executable. Any programming language able to manipulate >> files >> and binary >> data, can be used to create a linker. > > If you want, you can prove this by starting a competive linker project. > Probably both Digitalmars and Microsoft have done everything they can to > make competition as hard as possible by leaving the object file format > undocumented and filled the implementation with weird corner cases to make > reverse engineering extremely hard. Microsoft even does minor changes in > every version to break compatibility. > > Even if a 10 man team uses some open source linker as a base and writes > the linker in D, you can't beat Walter. The productivity of hardcore > domain experts is nearly two orders of magnitude better than that of > novices. The toolchain issues will be history by the end of this year. > > - G.W.
