On 7/28/14, 11:37 AM, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Tue, Jul 29, 2014 at 04:24:27AM +1000, Daniel Murphy via Digitalmars-d wrote:
"Andrei Alexandrescu" wrote in message
news:lr6395$19r7$1...@digitalmars.com...
There'd also be the argument that using phobos inside ddmd would make
the latter a better test for itself and phobos. -- Andrei
This is true, but my main concern is the quality of the compiler
source.
My main concerns are: (not in order)
- Compile time
- Binary bloat
I see this as a good thing, actually. Not that I think it's good to
increase compile time and binary bloat, but that when this happens, we
will have very strong incentives to do something about it, that will
drive us to do whatever it takes for Phobos to *not* get in the way of
fast compile times and to *not* introduce tons of template bloat. The
end result will be a far better quality Phobos than we might ever
achieve otherwise, since external D codebases wouldn't be as strong an
incentive as the compiler itself would.
YES! I wrote my reply before reading this!! -- Andrei
