
Merging In The GNU D Language Compiler To GCC - toni
http://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc/2011-10/msg00037.html
======
feb
Reading the thread, it's surprising how much work is still needed to merge the
D frontend (GDC) into the GCC project:

* Assign copyright to the FSF which requires contacting all authors including those who are MIA.

* Update the code to the GCC coding conventions

* Submit for review patches to the GCC core that where shipped with GDC and get them accepted

* Finding a co-maintainer

* Promise to continue to maintain the code

* Implement naked functions attribute

* Convert the testsuite to Dejagnu

* Downgrade the zlib library used by GDC or upgrade the one in GCC

Those are all reasonable requirements from the GCC project, but impose some
extra work for the GDC maintainers. Cheers to them for biting the bullet.

~~~
ggchappell
> Assign copyright to the FSF which requires contacting all authors including
> those who are MIA.

What for? GDC is distributed under the GPL. Isn't it kind of the whole point
of the GPL, that this kind of thing can be done without having to ask for
special permission?

------
aklein
I'd be so excited for D to gain wider adoption. One area in which it really
shines is in metaprogramming (compile-time code generation) that is such a
headache in C++. <http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/templates-revisited.html>

------
Nelson69
I think this is good news, if it all happens. There are some hurdles though. D
have always had a nice look about it, a good reliable, predictable, open
compiler is a huge step to greater acceptance.

------
r4vik
once D is in GCC does that mean most of the rationale of Go(lang) is gone, in
that both D and Go are supposed to be non-shitty C++.

Now I don't need to download another compiler to write D and I can use c
libraries with it, I don't think Go has much over D in order to make me go to
the effort of installing a Go compiler.

~~~
sambeau
No.

D is a rethinking of C++.

Go is a re-imagining of C++.

~~~
andralex
I disagree. As far as I can tell, Go is a resolute step backwards from C++ in
efficiency, modeling power, and generic programming. That's not necessarily
bad; simplicity has its virtue, too. The larger problem is that Go fails to
avail itself of the progress in programming languages theory and practice in
the past 30 years.

~~~
uriel
Go is specially a huge step backwards from C++ in convoluted insanity.

~~~
deadalnix
as well as D.

~~~
andralex
without throwing the good parts away.

