On Thu, 05 Aug 2010 22:34:34 +0000, mwarning wrote: > On Thu, 05 Aug 2010 13:55:40 -0700, Walter Bright wrote: > >> Adam Ruppe wrote: >>> To abandon DMD for that is language suicide. >> >> Well, one reason (certainly not the only one) I keep with the current >> dmd back end is that I don't need to spend time convincing some other >> organization to fix/improve/customize it for better D support. I can >> just get it done. >> >> Being in control of the toolchain has a lot of benefits. >> >> For example, look at gdb, and trying to get it to support D - not for >> the patches themselves, but getting them accepted into the standard >> gdb. > > Thanks for the clarification. > Imho, doing/checking everything already has taken years and will > continue to take many years. I don't think it's a very viable concept.
.. but I hope it works out well. :)
