On 05-Jul-12 22:22, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
On 7/5/12 12:39 PM, Roman D. Boiko wrote:
On Thursday, 5 July 2012 at 16:28:57 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
It's all too common for someone to suggest that we should
do something or implement something without ever attempting to do it
themselves, and in general, stuff around here gets done because
someone really wants it done, takes the time to do it, and sees it
through until its done and in Phobos.
- Jonathan M Davis
Resume: everybody is welcome to join effort of translating DMD front
end, and improving Pegged.
Also I would like to invite those interested in DCT project to help me
with it. Right now I'm trying to understand whether it is possible to
incorporate Pegged inside without losing anything critical (and I think
it is very likely possible), and how exactly to do that.
Dmitry proposed to help improve Pegged (or some other compiler's) speed.
Anyone else?
I'd really want to create a task force on this, it is of strategic
importance to D. In Walter's own words, no new feature is going to push
us forward since we're not really using the great goodies we've got, and
CTFE technology is the most important.
Count me as interested.
CTFE needs more correctness & speed though. So to put it blantly - no
it's not possible right NOW.
BUT it doesn't prevent us from planing and doing a proof of concept.
Pegged seems a good starting point even if we end up re-writing it from
scratch.
I also am actively opposed to a project of just translating D's
front-end to D and dropping it into Phobos because it would smother (a)
work on generic parser generators, and (b) strong, dependable
formalization of D's syntax.
Well put. It shouldn't stop people from doing parsers, IMO the more the
merrier.
--
Dmitry Olshansky
