On 2 Sep 2015 9:05 pm, "Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d" < digitalmars-d@puremagic.com> wrote: > > On 8/29/2015 1:13 PM, Ola Fosheim Grostad wrote: >> >> But the net effect of maintaining 3 different backends is sending signals that >> the project lacks direction and priorities. > > > Back when there was only 1 compiler, people complained about that, saying it signaled lack of reliable support. >
Is this argument still being used? This is the best example of double standards that outside reviewers give about the core D maintainers. In any other language, you'd call it freedom of choice (devil's advocate: the fact that there are dozens of C++ compilers has a negative impact on usage and adoption). Iain.