"Trass3r" <[email protected]> wrote in message news:op.v2iqj1t23ncmek@enigma... > Am 28.09.2011, 01:30 Uhr, schrieb Ruben <[email protected]>: > >> Hello, is there a chance an ARM backend can be written for dmd this year? > > No. We won't even get Win x64 support in that time frame. > >> it appears that those wanting to use ARM are pointed at gdc/ldc, >> but it seems like those two projects are usually behind in D2 support > > gdc is very active and so far has always been on par with dmd. > There are a few ARM-specific bugs though that still need to be fixed. Feel > free to help out. > ldc is only 1 revision behind currently. > > >> Some estimate of when dmd might come to ARM or >> why such a port is not a priority would be appreciated. > > Cause there are plenty of bugs and unfinished feature implementations that > are way more important. > Plus you are free to use gdc or ldc to generate code for ARM targets > *right now*. >
Considering that myself and other people are *already* getting by with D on x86 right now, I really have to strongly disagree with making D usable on ARM being less important. Yes, there's definitely a lot of very important things to be done right here on x86, but at least its *usable* on x86. So usable, in fact, that there's people and companies already relying on it for production work. But for ARM tagerts, you're pretty much SOL at the moment, from what I understand. Of course, I'm not saying "Hey DMD/GDC/LDC/druntime/phobos developers, go do that!!!" I have no right to say anything like that, especially since I'm unable to help out on it myself. But I'm just saying I don't believe anything could *really* be more important for D right now (well, except maybe dynamic libs if there's still any big problems with that - I haven't tried). > The real problem is druntime, memory management and the like that need to > be sorted out. > But nobody fixed those yet.
