• Manu (10/10) Sep 01 2018 I know there's been discussion on this before, I just want a
• Joakim (5/19) Sep 01 2018 What specifically do you want to cross-compile to, something like
• Manu (3/24) Sep 01 2018 Yes, but we're talking about DMD...
• bauss (2/23) Sep 03 2018 Not everyone can or want to use LDC.
• Joakim (4/13) Sep 03 2018 Why not? If you're not optimizing or iterating on your code, it's
• Manu (5/19) Sep 03 2018 DMD is for iterating on DMD ;)
• Laurent =?UTF-8?B?VHLDqWd1aWVy?= (4/7) Sep 03 2018 What if you want to reproduce a bug that only happens when
• Iain Buclaw (3/11) Sep 03 2018 GDC is kept in sync with dmd nightlies on a weekly or twice-weekly basis...
• Laurent =?UTF-8?B?VHLDqWd1aWVy?= (3/5) Sep 03 2018 I saw the post about using the 2.081 frontend, but I didn't know
• bauss (2/16) Sep 03 2018 Sometimes all you got are a few hours when working professionally.
• Jacob Carlborg (5/19) Sep 03 2018 Yeah, I don't see a reason why DMD should not be a
• Manu (7/26) Sep 03 2018 Not being a cross-compiler makes iteration and testing unnecessarily

Manu <turkeyman gmail.com> writes:

I know there's been discussion on this before, I just want a
definitive reference.

It looks like it would be relatively straight forward for DMD to be a
cross-compiler.
A few version() statements could be runtime if's, and that's pretty much it.
When hacking on parts of DMD, I frequently make hacks that turn such
versions into runtime if's to test multiple targets from the one dev
workflow.

It would be about 100 times more convenient to supply an arg, than
make hacks all over the code... so, why not?

Joakim <dlang joakim.fea.st> writes:

On Saturday, 1 September 2018 at 20:12:24 UTC, Manu wrote:
 I know there's been discussion on this before, I just want a 
 definitive reference.

 It looks like it would be relatively straight forward for DMD 
 to be a
 cross-compiler.
 A few version() statements could be runtime if's, and that's 
 pretty much it.
 When hacking on parts of DMD, I frequently make hacks that turn 
 such
 versions into runtime if's to test multiple targets from the 
 one dev
 workflow.

 It would be about 100 times more convenient to supply an arg, 
 than make hacks all over the code... so, why not?

What specifically do you want to cross-compile to, something like 
Windows to macOS? LDC already does all this, ie the one compiler 
cross-compiles to every other platform with a single flag, may 
just want to use it.

Manu <turkeyman gmail.com> writes:

On Sat, 1 Sep 2018 at 18:55, Joakim via Digitalmars-d
<digitalmars-d puremagic.com> wrote:
 On Saturday, 1 September 2018 at 20:12:24 UTC, Manu wrote:
 I know there's been discussion on this before, I just want a
 definitive reference.

 It looks like it would be relatively straight forward for DMD
 to be a
 cross-compiler.
 A few version() statements could be runtime if's, and that's
 pretty much it.
 When hacking on parts of DMD, I frequently make hacks that turn
 such
 versions into runtime if's to test multiple targets from the
 one dev
 workflow.

 It would be about 100 times more convenient to supply an arg,
 than make hacks all over the code... so, why not?

 What specifically do you want to cross-compile to, something like
 Windows to macOS? LDC already does all this, ie the one compiler
 cross-compiles to every other platform with a single flag, may
 just want to use it.

Yes, but we're talking about DMD...

bauss <jj_1337 live.dk> writes:

On Sunday, 2 September 2018 at 01:52:18 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 On Saturday, 1 September 2018 at 20:12:24 UTC, Manu wrote:
 I know there's been discussion on this before, I just want a 
 definitive reference.

 It looks like it would be relatively straight forward for DMD 
 to be a
 cross-compiler.
 A few version() statements could be runtime if's, and that's 
 pretty much it.
 When hacking on parts of DMD, I frequently make hacks that 
 turn such
 versions into runtime if's to test multiple targets from the 
 one dev
 workflow.

 It would be about 100 times more convenient to supply an arg, 
 than make hacks all over the code... so, why not?

 What specifically do you want to cross-compile to, something 
 like Windows to macOS? LDC already does all this, ie the one 
 compiler cross-compiles to every other platform with a single 
 flag, may just want to use it.

Not everyone can or want to use LDC.

Joakim <dlang joakim.fea.st> writes:

On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 09:21:21 UTC, bauss wrote:
 On Sunday, 2 September 2018 at 01:52:18 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 On Saturday, 1 September 2018 at 20:12:24 UTC, Manu wrote:
 [...]

 What specifically do you want to cross-compile to, something 
 like Windows to macOS? LDC already does all this, ie the one 
 compiler cross-compiles to every other platform with a single 
 flag, may just want to use it.

 Not everyone can or want to use LDC.

Why not? If you're not optimizing or iterating on your code, it's 
a reasonable replacement. If you're optimizing, you should only 
be using LDC or gdc.

Manu <turkeyman gmail.com> writes:

On Mon, 3 Sep 2018 at 02:35, Joakim via Digitalmars-d
<digitalmars-d puremagic.com> wrote:
 On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 09:21:21 UTC, bauss wrote:
 On Sunday, 2 September 2018 at 01:52:18 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 On Saturday, 1 September 2018 at 20:12:24 UTC, Manu wrote:
 [...]

 What specifically do you want to cross-compile to, something
 like Windows to macOS? LDC already does all this, ie the one
 compiler cross-compiles to every other platform with a single
 flag, may just want to use it.

 Not everyone can or want to use LDC.

 Why not? If you're not optimizing or iterating on your code, it's
 a reasonable replacement. If you're optimizing, you should only
 be using LDC or gdc.

DMD is for iterating on DMD ;)
Making DMD patches in LDC and then pushing upstream is much more of a
hassle. DMD build/iteration time is super fast too.

Laurent =?UTF-8?B?VHLDqWd1aWVy?= <laurent.treguier.sink gmail.com> writes:

On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 09:32:29 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 Why not? If you're not optimizing or iterating on your code, 
 it's a reasonable replacement. If you're optimizing, you should 
 only be using LDC or gdc.

What if you want to reproduce a bug that only happens when 
compiling with dmd for some weird reason ? Or what if you want to 
use the very latest features from dmd nightlies ?

Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw gdcproject.org> writes:

On 3 September 2018 at 15:12, Laurent Tréguier via Digitalmars-d
<digitalmars-d puremagic.com> wrote:
 On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 09:32:29 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 Why not? If you're not optimizing or iterating on your code, it's a
 reasonable replacement. If you're optimizing, you should only be using LDC
 or gdc.


 What if you want to reproduce a bug that only happens when compiling with
 dmd for some weird reason ? Or what if you want to use the very latest
 features from dmd nightlies ?

GDC is kept in sync with dmd nightlies on a weekly or twice-weekly basis.

Laurent =?UTF-8?B?VHLDqWd1aWVy?= <laurent.treguier.sink gmail.com> writes:

On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 14:00:58 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
 GDC is kept in sync with dmd nightlies on a weekly or 
 twice-weekly basis.

I saw the post about using the 2.081 frontend, but I didn't know 
about that. That's great, thanks for the info !

bauss <jj_1337 live.dk> writes:

On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 14:00:58 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
 On 3 September 2018 at 15:12, Laurent Tréguier via 
 Digitalmars-d <digitalmars-d puremagic.com> wrote:
 On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 09:32:29 UTC, Joakim wrote:
 Why not? If you're not optimizing or iterating on your code, 
 it's a reasonable replacement. If you're optimizing, you 
 should only be using LDC or gdc.


 What if you want to reproduce a bug that only happens when 
 compiling with dmd for some weird reason ? Or what if you want 
 to use the very latest features from dmd nightlies ?

 GDC is kept in sync with dmd nightlies on a weekly or 
 twice-weekly basis.

Sometimes all you got are a few hours when working professionally.

Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> writes:

On Saturday, 1 September 2018 at 20:12:24 UTC, Manu wrote:
 I know there's been discussion on this before, I just want a 
 definitive reference.

 It looks like it would be relatively straight forward for DMD 
 to be a
 cross-compiler.
 A few version() statements could be runtime if's, and that's 
 pretty much it.
 When hacking on parts of DMD, I frequently make hacks that turn 
 such
 versions into runtime if's to test multiple targets from the 
 one dev
 workflow.

 It would be about 100 times more convenient to supply an arg, 
 than make hacks all over the code... so, why not?

Yeah, I don't see a reason why DMD should not be a 
cross-compiler. I've been thinking the same thing as well.

--
/Jacob Carlborg

Manu <turkeyman gmail.com> writes:

On Mon, 3 Sep 2018 at 01:40, Jacob Carlborg via Digitalmars-d
<digitalmars-d puremagic.com> wrote:
 On Saturday, 1 September 2018 at 20:12:24 UTC, Manu wrote:
 I know there's been discussion on this before, I just want a
 definitive reference.

 It looks like it would be relatively straight forward for DMD
 to be a
 cross-compiler.
 A few version() statements could be runtime if's, and that's
 pretty much it.
 When hacking on parts of DMD, I frequently make hacks that turn
 such
 versions into runtime if's to test multiple targets from the
 one dev
 workflow.

 It would be about 100 times more convenient to supply an arg,
 than make hacks all over the code... so, why not?

 Yeah, I don't see a reason why DMD should not be a
 cross-compiler. I've been thinking the same thing as well.

Not being a cross-compiler makes iteration and testing unnecessarily
hard and slow.
We should try and reduce friction to developing DMD. Not being a
cross-compiler has definitely stopped me on multiple instances on
account of "ah, it's all just too hard!".