www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

D.gnu - Alive?

reply "Dana Anderson" <resistor mac.com> writes:
Is this project still alive?  Nothing seems to have happened in an awfully
long time, but I'd still love to see D for other platforms some day!

Dana

--
Dana M. Anderson
Athens, GA
Oct 25 2003
next sibling parent Jan Knepper <jan smartsoft.us> writes:
Well, it definitely is not dead, but Walter has created a D for Linux 
himself and D for BSD-Unix is in progress...

Thanks!
Jan



Dana Anderson wrote:
 Is this project still alive?  Nothing seems to have happened in an awfully
 long time, but I'd still love to see D for other platforms some day!
 
 Dana
 
 --
 Dana M. Anderson
 Athens, GA
 
 

-- ManiaC++ Jan Knepper
Oct 25 2003
prev sibling next sibling parent Ilya Minkov <minkov cs.tum.edu> writes:
I'm currently reading the compiler source and shall possibly write a doc 
on binding back-ends to D. Maybe it shall be of use to someone with GCC 
knowledge.

-eye

Dana Anderson wrote:
 Is this project still alive?  Nothing seems to have happened in an awfully
 long time, but I'd still love to see D for other platforms some day!
 
 Dana
 
 --
 Dana M. Anderson
 Athens, GA
 
 

Oct 26 2003
prev sibling parent "Steve Maillet" <nospam1 EntelechyConsulting.com> writes:
Aside from the comments of others here. The major problem I see is a rather
significant shift within GCC on the backend. GIMPLE is a new twist to the
gcc backend that isn't particularly well documented outside of the core GCC
developers who are pretty tightly focused on the languages GCC already
supports. So the task of sticking Walter's open front end on to the GCC back
end is a fairly huge and daunting task with lot's and lot's of pitfalls
waiting, (heck I'd even say a few chasms are hidden under thin layers there)

Another problem is that at this point D is effectively a proprietary
language and all the major industry focus is on Java and .NET, native
languages are "un-cool" at the moment. It's a new language with new ways of
doing things and thinking about systems. Changes don't come quickly to this
industry despite appearances to the contrary. (We STILL have mission
critical FORTRAN and BASIC apps in existence in the world!) So really D is
not much more then a curiosity at best for most developers so while they
might try it out there is no real industry drive to use it. Heck there are a
lot of developer's terrified of this new fangled C++ cuz it makes their
brain hurt!  ("What do you mean I'm not supposed to use 'goto' for all my
code branches!?")

Yes, it would be absolutely fabulous to have D for non x86 platforms
especially for embedded devices With controlled garbage collection and the
benefits of native code compilation combined with the ability to step
outside the garbage collected world to raw memory allocations D is a
fantastic language for use in real-time embedded devices. I've recently
embarked on getting the x86 version of it integrated into Visual Studio.NET
for use with Windows CE x86 based devices at least and am hoping somebody
can get the GCC going for use on other CPUs. Maybe someday my company will
have the resources to fund that effort but it certainly doesn't have it at
this point in time.

-- 
Steve Maillet (eMVP)
Entelechy Consulting
smaillet_AT_EntelechyConsulting_DOT_com
Nov 07 2003