Imagine also having parsers for other languages (like C) as a library solution. being able to translate C code to D code in the form of a library solution at compile-time means the best C-compatibility ever!
On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 11:55 PM, Gor Gyolchanyan <[email protected]> wrote: > Damn! a library lexer and parser of D! I think we'll eventually drop > the "compile-time only" restriction from mixins! :-) > > On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 11:47 PM, Jonathan M Davis <[email protected]> > wrote: >> On Wednesday, September 28, 2011 17:09:24 Gor Gyolchanyan wrote: >>> I know, this has been discussed earlier, but i don't quite understand >>> the real reason why isn't DMD's front-end being written in D. >>> Existing DDMD is pointless (and i think abandoned), because it's just >>> a plain rewrite with the same C-style constructs and completely >>> rewriting it to be a correct D code would mean being unable to get the >>> bug-fixes on DMD. >>> I remember, that Walter said about the problems with compatibility >>> with the back-end, that would arise. >>> But isn't D supposed to be binary compatible with C? >>> AFAIK the only extra thing to be done would be to provide a C facade >>> around the D front-end, that would be given to the back-end. >>> Why not? >> >> I would point out that there is an intention to eventually get a D lexer and >> parser into Phobos so that tools can take advantage of them. Those could >> eventually lead to a frontend in D but would provide benefits far beyond >> simply >> having the compiler in D. >> >> - Jonathan M Davis >> >
