On Monday, 1 June 2015 at 19:48:01 UTC, weaselcat wrote:
at the risk of sounding like a broken record, if ldc/gdc not being 2.067 stops a DDMD release due to dmd's generated code being too slow, maybe it's time to phase dmd out ;)

Given how slow they are at compiling? Not a chance. dmd's speed is a huge feature.

What I would recommend (and have heard others recommend) is that development normally be done with dmd so that you can get the fast compile-test-edit cycle that it enables and then use gdc or ldc when you generate production code so that it'll actually then be optimized properly. That way, you get fast production binaries _and_ fast compilation speed where you need it. But developing code with gdc or ldc would just be painful in comparison to developing with dmd.

- Jonathan M Davis

Reply via email to