On Thursday, 18 February 2016 at 13:23:34 UTC, Andrei
Alexandrescu wrote:
Which of these advantages cannot be taken advantage of today?
I suppose if you combine the feature sets of all compilers you
will to some degree be able to get the best of all worlds. But
the compiler *representing* the language in the wild, in
benchmarks could be one with an offering that fits the largest
amount of potential users, and the least possible friction
towards the adoption, could it not?
Is it optimal that the compiler labelled *official* offers the
least "advantages" of all?
There is "Strong optimization" under LDC and GDC in the downloads
page, however, we still see people downloading DMD and
benchmarking with it, don't we? Yes, people don't read a lot on
the web, as soon as they see "official" most people pick that and
stop reading.
Walter does most of the feature implementation work. Having a
familiar back-to-back codebase is a big asset. Compilation
speed is a big asset, too, probably not as big.
I agree, but I don't see why this would have to change. It
shouldn't change. Frontend development could happen on DMD as the
*reference* compiler.
A step everybody would agree is good would be to make it easy
for the three compilers to stay in sync.
That would be the cherry on top.
