On Friday, 3 April 2015 at 23:59:52 UTC, weaselcat wrote:
On Friday, 3 April 2015 at 23:47:48 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
On Friday, 3 April 2015 at 22:46:31 UTC, weaselcat wrote:
On Friday, 3 April 2015 at 20:56:09 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
On Friday, 3 April 2015 at 19:45:29 UTC, weaselcat wrote:
The reliance on GDC/LDC to produce production-level
binaries(i.e, optimized) and the actual people working on
them really is worrisome. If Iain or Kai decided one day to
leave D, it would be a very big blow I think.
Yes. And considering there is no hope that we bring dmd's
backend up to speed with GCC or LLVM (let's be realistic one
second) what is even more worrisome is how little they are
integrated in the workflow.
The best way to help would probably be to work on contributor
guides/documentation. They don't seem to have much of either
of these - or I'm blind(good possibility.)
Even if so what is the point ? That is completely wasted work.
It is already done elsewhere.
That is aggravated pathological NIH syndrome right there.
Maybe I'm misreading, but I don't see how documentation is NIH
syndrome.
Like always in economy, the question is compared to what ?
Writing documentation on that thing, compared to what valuable
use of people's time.
Considering there is no hope for this to compete with other
backends in term of supported targets, the only reason you'd have
to invest in there is NIH syndrome.
