On Mon, Apr 9, 2012 at 8:21 PM, Ary Manzana <a...@esperanto.org.ar> wrote:
> On 4/9/12 10:58 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote: > >> On 2012-04-09 15:19, Manu wrote: >> >>> OMG, DO WANT! :P >>> Who wrote this? I wonder if they'd be interested in adapting it to >>> VisualD + MonoDevelop? >>> >> >> That would be Ary Manzana. I think one of the reasons why he stopped >> working on this was that he ported the DMD frontend to Java and it's >> just a pain to stay updated with DMD. >> > > Yes, it was a pain. I can't understand how I did it. Aaaah... the times > when one was young. :-P > > Robert Fraser also helped a lot with porting, doing some refactorings and > many other cool stuff. I don't remember seeing a message of him in this > newsgroup for a long time now... > > > This comes back to us again, again and again. We _badly need_ a compiler >> that is usable as a library. Preferably with a stable API which it >> possible to create bindings for other languages. For that compiler to be >> stay up to date it needs to be the reference implementation, i.e. the >> one that Walter works on. >> >> Also Walter won't just drop DMD and replace it with something else or >> start a major refactoring process on the existing code base. >> > > Yes, D definitely needs that. The Eclipse plugin could just use bindings > to the D compiler API with JNI. > > In fact, I think Walter and company should stop working on the current DMD > codebase and start all over again. The code, as I see it, is a big mess. > Now that the spec is more or less "clear" and not many new features are > added, I think this is the time to do it. > > Actually, nobody has to wait Walter. The community could just start > writing a D compiler in D, host it in github and work with pull requests... > something like what Rubinius has done with Ruby. > It's already been started. SDC: https://github.com/bhelyer/SDC Regards, Brad Anderson > > Though you might think it'll be harder to catch up with language changes, > if the code has a better design I think introducing new changes should be > much easier than in DMD's current codebase. > > > BTW, Descent has a compile time debugger as well, if I recall correctly. >> > > Yeah, I'm not sure how well that works. >