On Mon, 25 May 2015 16:59:48 +0200, Iain Buclaw via Digitalmars-d wrote: > On 25 May 2015 09:45, "ketmar via Digitalmars-d" < > digitalmars-d@puremagic.com> wrote: >> >> On Mon, 25 May 2015 00:24:26 +0200, Iain Buclaw via Digitalmars-d >> wrote: >> >> > I find the situation being like at university looking for grants or >> > funding, and constantly being told. 'Oh yes, it is important what >> > you are doing, and you must keep doing it as it is pivotal for future >> > success. But no, we won't help you.' >> >> that's 'cause GCC is untameable beast for average Joe like me, for >> example. ;-) > > Both have equal complexity, so that is no excuse. DMD just operates at > a lower level, on a smaller scale, and forces you to think about the > effect on generated object code.
i'm afraid that they doesn't have equal complexity. i can read DMD code (ok, even backend, it's hard, but doable), but i cannot read GCC backend code in the same amount of time. and there are alot more things i have to know to understand GDC. i made some trivial fixes in DMD backend, yet i don't even know where to start to understand at least *something* in GCC.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
