www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D.announce - warp: a fast C and C++ preprocessor

reply Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> writes:
Facebook is open-sourcing warp, a fast C and C++ preprocessor written by 
Walter Bright.

http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/21m0bz/warp_a_fast_c_and_c_preprocessor/

https://news.ycombinator.com/newest

https://twitter.com/fbOpenSource/status/449611378219679744

https://www.facebook.com/dlang.org/posts/10202207506322611?stream_ref=10


Andrei
Mar 28 2014
next sibling parent Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> writes:
On 3/28/2014 11:27 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

 https://news.ycombinator.com/newest


It was posted around 11:20 PST, if that helps find it in the morass of new
postings.
Mar 28 2014
prev sibling next sibling parent Paulo Pinto <pjmlp progtools.org> writes:
Am 28.03.2014 19:27, schrieb Andrei Alexandrescu:

 Facebook is open-sourcing warp, a fast C and C++ preprocessor written by
 Walter Bright.

 http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/21m0bz/warp_a_fast_c_and_c_preprocessor/


 https://news.ycombinator.com/newest

 https://twitter.com/fbOpenSource/status/449611378219679744

 https://www.facebook.com/dlang.org/posts/10202207506322611?stream_ref=10


 Andrei


Just read the article. Quite interesting.

Congratulations!

Paulo
Mar 28 2014
prev sibling next sibling parent reply "Meta" <jared771 gmail.com> writes:
On Friday, 28 March 2014 at 18:27:17 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu 
wrote:

 Facebook is open-sourcing warp, a fast C and C++ preprocessor 
 written by Walter Bright.

 http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/21m0bz/warp_a_fast_c_and_c_preprocessor/

 https://news.ycombinator.com/newest

 https://twitter.com/fbOpenSource/status/449611378219679744

 https://www.facebook.com/dlang.org/posts/10202207506322611?stream_ref=10


 Andrei


Is Warp written in D? I don't think it was made clear in the 
article.
Mar 28 2014
next sibling parent reply =?UTF-8?B?IlRow6lv?= Bueno" <munrek gmx.com> writes:
On Friday, 28 March 2014 at 19:19:03 UTC, Meta wrote:

 On Friday, 28 March 2014 at 18:27:17 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu 
 wrote:

 Facebook is open-sourcing warp, a fast C and C++ preprocessor 
 written by Walter Bright.

 http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/21m0bz/warp_a_fast_c_and_c_preprocessor/

 https://news.ycombinator.com/newest

 https://twitter.com/fbOpenSource/status/449611378219679744

 https://www.facebook.com/dlang.org/posts/10202207506322611?stream_ref=10


 Andrei


 Is Warp written in D? I don't think it was made clear in the 
 article.


It's clear when you read the full interview :/
Anyway congratulations, this is a great proof of D's power, and
also a nice vote of confidence from Facebook :)
Mar 28 2014
parent reply "Meta" <jared771 gmail.com> writes:
On Friday, 28 March 2014 at 19:36:02 UTC, Théo Bueno wrote:

 It's clear when you read the full interview :/
 Anyway congratulations, this is a great proof of D's power, and
 also a nice vote of confidence from Facebook :)


I read quickly through the interview, and although they talked 
quite a bit about D, I never saw it specifically mentioned that 
Warp is written in D.
Mar 28 2014
parent reply John Stahara <john.stahara+dlang gmail.com> writes:
On Fri, 28 Mar 2014 19:46:48 +0000, Meta wrote:


 On Friday, 28 March 2014 at 19:36:02 UTC, Théo Bueno wrote:

 It's clear when you read the full interview :/
 Anyway congratulations, this is a great proof of D's power, and also a
 nice vote of confidence from Facebook :)


 
 I read quickly through the interview, and although they talked quite a
 bit about D, I never saw it specifically mentioned that Warp is written
 in D.


The very first link in the article is the github repository of source 
files, all of which are written in D.

--jjs
Mar 28 2014
parent "MattCoder" <somekindofmonster email.com.br> writes:
On Friday, 28 March 2014 at 19:57:06 UTC, John Stahara wrote:

 The very first link in the article is the github repository of 
 source
 files, all of which are written in D.

 --jjs


Yes, here: https://github.com/facebook/warp

Matheus.
Mar 28 2014
prev sibling parent Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> writes:
On 3/28/14, 12:19 PM, Meta wrote:

 Is Warp written in D? I don't think it was made clear in the article.


We wanted to be subdued about it and focus on the technical discussion 
instead of making it seem like an ad for D. Of course that still wasn't 
enough for someone on hackernews... 
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7489160

Andrei
Mar 28 2014
prev sibling next sibling parent reply =?UTF-8?B?QWxpIMOHZWhyZWxp?= <acehreli yahoo.com> writes:
On 03/28/2014 11:27 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:


 Facebook is open-sourcing warp, a fast C and C++ preprocessor


It could be useful for me just this past week in a throw-away D program 
that I wrote (at work! :) ) to parse some C and C++ files very crudely.

Ali
Mar 28 2014
parent reply "Kagamin" <spam here.lot> writes:
On Friday, 28 March 2014 at 21:16:29 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:

 It could be useful for me just this past week in a throw-away D 
 program that I wrote (at work! :) ) to parse some C and C++ 
 files very crudely.


As I understand, a preprocessor works on macros only, the rest is 
lexed minimally.
Mar 30 2014
parent reply Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> writes:
On 3/30/2014 10:08 AM, Kagamin wrote:

 On Friday, 28 March 2014 at 21:16:29 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:

 It could be useful for me just this past week in a throw-away D program that I
 wrote (at work! :) ) to parse some C and C++ files very crudely.


 As I understand, a preprocessor works on macros only, the rest is lexed
minimally.


Yes, it won't help much with the rest.
Mar 30 2014
parent reply "ixid" <nuaccount gmail.com> writes:
On Sunday, 30 March 2014 at 19:28:20 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:

 On 3/30/2014 10:08 AM, Kagamin wrote:

 On Friday, 28 March 2014 at 21:16:29 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:

 It could be useful for me just this past week in a throw-away 
 D program that I
 wrote (at work! :) ) to parse some C and C++ files very 
 crudely.


 As I understand, a preprocessor works on macros only, the rest 
 is lexed minimally.


 Yes, it won't help much with the rest.


Were those ycombinator performance figures putting warp someway 
behind clang valid? Perhaps we should unleash a community effort 
to match clang?
Mar 30 2014
next sibling parent reply Andrej Mitrovic <andrej.mitrovich gmail.com> writes:
On 3/30/14, ixid <nuaccount gmail.com> wrote:

 Perhaps we should unleash a community effort to match clang?


Sounds like wasted effort, why improve tools for parsing C++ instead
of improving tools for parsing D?
Mar 30 2014
next sibling parent reply "Peter Alexander" <peter.alexander.au gmail.com> writes:
On Sunday, 30 March 2014 at 20:43:52 UTC, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:

 On 3/30/14, ixid <nuaccount gmail.com> wrote:

 Perhaps we should unleash a community effort to match clang?


 Sounds like wasted effort, why improve tools for parsing C++ 
 instead
 of improving tools for parsing D?


It's good advertising for D, in a few ways:

1. C++ devs looking for faster compiles will learn about warp, 
and learn about D.
2. It shows that D is being used successfully in real projects.
3. It shows that D lives up to its performance claims.
Mar 30 2014
next sibling parent reply Andrej Mitrovic <andrej.mitrovich gmail.com> writes:
On 3/30/14, Peter Alexander <peter.alexander.au gmail.com> wrote:

 3. It shows that D lives up to its performance claims.


Maybe. But there's a sore thumb in that codebase: GC.disable();

And that will do exactly the opposite for its performance claims (with
regards to advertising it).
Mar 30 2014
parent reply Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> writes:
On 3/30/2014 2:15 PM, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:

 Maybe. But there's a sore thumb in that codebase: GC.disable();

 And that will do exactly the opposite for its performance claims (with
 regards to advertising it).


Not really. It proves that you can absolutely get work done in D without using 
the GC.
Mar 30 2014
parent reply Andrej Mitrovic <andrej.mitrovich gmail.com> writes:
On 3/30/14, Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> wrote:

 Not really. It proves that you can absolutely get work done in D without
 using the GC.


But D has to prove that you can get work done *with* using the GC. So
warp really sends the opposite message.
Mar 30 2014
parent Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> writes:
On 3/30/2014 3:07 PM, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:

 But D has to prove that you can get work done *with* using the GC.


No matter how good the GC is, the word "GC" turns away a lot of programmers
with 
a knee-jerk response. I aimed to show that one can write effective D programs 
without using the GC.
Mar 30 2014
prev sibling parent John J <john.joyus gmail.com> writes:
On 03/30/2014 04:58 PM, Peter Alexander wrote:

 On Sunday, 30 March 2014 at 20:43:52 UTC, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:

 On 3/30/14, ixid <nuaccount gmail.com> wrote:

 Perhaps we should unleash a community effort to match clang?


 Sounds like wasted effort, why improve tools for parsing C++ instead
 of improving tools for parsing D?


 It's good advertising for D, in a few ways:

 1. C++ devs looking for faster compiles will learn about warp, and learn
 about D.
 2. It shows that D is being used successfully in real projects.
 3. It shows that D lives up to its performance claims.


+1
Mar 30 2014
prev sibling parent "Kagamin" <spam here.lot> writes:
On Sunday, 30 March 2014 at 20:43:52 UTC, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:

 Sounds like wasted effort, why improve tools for parsing C++ 
 instead
 of improving tools for parsing D?


If the lexer is the culprit (though there's no proof for it), 
improving C lexer can help improve D lexer.
Mar 31 2014
prev sibling next sibling parent Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> writes:
On 3/30/2014 1:04 PM, ixid wrote:

 Were those ycombinator performance figures putting warp someway behind clang
 valid?


I presume so, as the figures for how Warp was faster than gnu cpp were 
comparable to what Andrei and I measured.
Mar 30 2014
prev sibling parent reply Leandro Lucarella <luca llucax.com.ar> writes:
ixid, el 30 de March a las 20:04 me escribiste:

 On Sunday, 30 March 2014 at 19:28:20 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:

On 3/30/2014 10:08 AM, Kagamin wrote:

On Friday, 28 March 2014 at 21:16:29 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:

It could be useful for me just this past week in a throw-away
D program that I
wrote (at work! :) ) to parse some C and C++ files very
crudely.


As I understand, a preprocessor works on macros only, the rest
is lexed minimally.


Yes, it won't help much with the rest.


 
 Were those ycombinator performance figures putting warp someway
 behind clang valid? Perhaps we should unleash a community effort to
 match clang?


I think that's pretty wasteful, why won't you just use clang? What's the
point of competing with another opensource project (a very good one,
that took a lot of men-hour to do a good C/C++ compiler, including the
preprocessor). I understand Walter did this in a couple of weeks, clang
have been developed for at least 7 years now, is totally understandable
that clang outperforms warp, is enough merit for warp to outperform GCC.
I mean, if someone wants to have fun, go ahead, but putting community
effort on that where there are so many places that are more important to
put the effort on seems a bit silly.

-- 
Leandro Lucarella (AKA luca)                     http://llucax.com.ar/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Debemos creer en los sueños del niño. Cuando el niño sueña con tetas, se
toca.
	-- Ricardo Vaporeso. Toulouse, 1915.
Mar 30 2014
next sibling parent reply "justme" <justme example.com> writes:
On Monday, 31 March 2014 at 00:09:34 UTC, Leandro Lucarella wrote:


 I think that's pretty wasteful, why won't you just use clang? 
 What's the
 point of competing with another opensource project (a very good 
 one,
 that took a lot of men-hour to do a good C/C++ compiler, 
 including the
 preprocessor). I understand Walter did this in a couple of 
 weeks, clang
 have been developed for at least 7 years now, is totally 
 understandable
 that clang outperforms warp, is enough merit for warp to 
 outperform GCC.
 I mean, if someone wants to have fun, go ahead, but putting 
 community
 effort on that where there are so many places that are more 
 important to
 put the effort on seems a bit silly.


Walter taking 2 weeks to do something comparable to what the 
clang and gcc guys have done over many years, serves as massive 
advertising for D.

Also, here we now have an entire project written by the man 
himself. That should serve as required reading for anybody who 
wants to learn how to code in the latest D.

And it serves as a benchmark for the best C++ coders. They can 
try to do the same in C++ in two weeks. (I bet by the end of the 
two weeks the guys are ready to switch languages!)
Mar 30 2014
next sibling parent reply "Brian Rogoff" <brogoff gmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 31 March 2014 at 03:25:37 UTC, justme wrote:

 On Monday, 31 March 2014 at 00:09:34 UTC, Leandro Lucarella 
 wrote:


 I mean, if someone wants to have fun, go ahead, but putting 
 community
 effort on that where there are so many places that are more 
 important to
 put the effort on seems a bit silly.




Agreed.


 Walter taking 2 weeks to do something comparable to what the 
 clang and gcc guys have done over many years, serves as massive 
 advertising for D.


Maybe, but sober observers will realize that Walter could 
probably have done something similar in C++. That doesn't negate 
your point though, that it's a good ad for D.


 Also, here we now have an entire project written by the man 
 himself. That should serve as required reading for anybody who 
 wants to learn how to code in the latest D.


I made a first pass through. I notice that almost every 'alias' 
is of the form

   alias existing_name new_name;

I thought that in the latest D the alias syntax was

   alias new_name = existing_name;

Should I be following Walter's lead with respect to alias?
Mar 30 2014
parent Jacob Carlborg <doob me.com> writes:
On 31/03/14 06:56, Brian Rogoff wrote:


 I made a first pass through. I notice that almost every 'alias' is of
 the form

    alias existing_name new_name;

 I thought that in the latest D the alias syntax was

    alias new_name = existing_name;

 Should I be following Walter's lead with respect to alias?


No, use the new syntax.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg
Mar 30 2014
prev sibling parent reply Leandro Lucarella <luca llucax.com.ar> writes:
justme, el 31 de March a las 03:25 me escribiste:

 On Monday, 31 March 2014 at 00:09:34 UTC, Leandro Lucarella wrote:

I think that's pretty wasteful, why won't you just use clang?
What's the
point of competing with another opensource project (a very good
one,
that took a lot of men-hour to do a good C/C++ compiler, including
the
preprocessor). I understand Walter did this in a couple of weeks,
clang
have been developed for at least 7 years now, is totally
understandable
that clang outperforms warp, is enough merit for warp to
outperform GCC.
I mean, if someone wants to have fun, go ahead, but putting
community
effort on that where there are so many places that are more
important to
put the effort on seems a bit silly.


 
 Walter taking 2 weeks to do something comparable to what the clang
 and gcc guys have done over many years, serves as massive
 advertising for D.
 
 Also, here we now have an entire project written by the man himself.
 That should serve as required reading for anybody who wants to learn
 how to code in the latest D.
 
 And it serves as a benchmark for the best C++ coders. They can try
 to do the same in C++ in two weeks. (I bet by the end of the two
 weeks the guys are ready to switch languages!)


Don't take the "couple of weeks" too literally, this is just my
impression after reading the article! Maybe it would be good if Walter
said how much time did it take him to code this.

-- 
Leandro Lucarella (AKA luca)                     http://llucax.com.ar/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Pack and get dressed
before your father hears us,
before all hell breaks loose.
Mar 31 2014
parent reply Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> writes:
On 3/31/2014 10:50 AM, Leandro Lucarella wrote:

 Don't take the "couple of weeks" too literally, this is just my
 impression after reading the article! Maybe it would be good if Walter
 said how much time did it take him to code this.


I spent 2 weeks on the initial version, and another week tuning it. Since then, 
I've fixed a handful of bugs, but that didn't amount to much time.
Mar 31 2014
parent reply "bearophile" <bearophileHUGS lycos.com> writes:
Walter Bright:


 Since then, I've fixed a handful of bugs, but that didn't 
 amount to much time.


Have you kept a list of such bugs/mistakes of yours for warp? It 
is an interesting list.

Bye,
bearophile
Mar 31 2014
parent reply Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> writes:
On 3/31/2014 2:06 PM, bearophile wrote:

 Walter Bright:


 Since then, I've fixed a handful of bugs, but that didn't amount to much time.


 Have you kept a list of such bugs/mistakes of yours for warp? It is an
 interesting list.


It's on github, though currently in a private repository. They were the usual 
mix of stupid coding mistakes and adjustments needed to match cpp's behavior.
Mar 31 2014
parent "Tove" <tove fransson.se> writes:
On Monday, 31 March 2014 at 21:16:47 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:

 On 3/31/2014 2:06 PM, bearophile wrote:

 Walter Bright:


 Since then, I've fixed a handful of bugs, but that didn't 
 amount to much time.


 Have you kept a list of such bugs/mistakes of yours for warp? 
 It is an
 interesting list.


 It's on github, though currently in a private repository. They 
 were the usual mix of stupid coding mistakes and adjustments 
 needed to match cpp's behavior.


I gave it a whirl on OSX Mavericks, Xcode 5.1
Apple LLVM version 5.1 (clang-503.0.38) (based on LLVM 3.4svn)

a.cc contains only:
#include <stdlib.h>

$ ./warpdrive_clang3_4 -I /usr/include a.cc >~/a.pp
/usr/include/stdlib.h(92) : identifier expected after 'defined'

#if !__DARWIN_NO_LONG_LONG <-- line 92
typedef struct {
	long long quot;
	long long rem;
} lldiv_t;
#endif /* !__DARWIN_NO_LONG_LONG */
Mar 31 2014
prev sibling parent reply Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> writes:
On 3/30/14, 5:01 PM, Leandro Lucarella wrote:

 ixid, el 30 de March a las 20:04 me escribiste:

 On Sunday, 30 March 2014 at 19:28:20 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:

 On 3/30/2014 10:08 AM, Kagamin wrote:

 On Friday, 28 March 2014 at 21:16:29 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:

 It could be useful for me just this past week in a throw-away
 D program that I
 wrote (at work! :) ) to parse some C and C++ files very
 crudely.


 As I understand, a preprocessor works on macros only, the rest
 is lexed minimally.


 Yes, it won't help much with the rest.


 Were those ycombinator performance figures putting warp someway
 behind clang valid? Perhaps we should unleash a community effort to
 match clang?


 I think that's pretty wasteful, why won't you just use clang? What's the
 point of competing with another opensource project (a very good one,
 that took a lot of men-hour to do a good C/C++ compiler, including the
 preprocessor). I understand Walter did this in a couple of weeks, clang
 have been developed for at least 7 years now, is totally understandable
 that clang outperforms warp, is enough merit for warp to outperform GCC.
 I mean, if someone wants to have fun, go ahead, but putting community
 effort on that where there are so many places that are more important to
 put the effort on seems a bit silly.


It's quite obvious. The D codebase is smaller and simpler than clang 
pp's and can be taken many places; the next thing I'll work on is 
multithreaded preprocessing that shares already opened files. One thing 
that is self-evident but the article could have stressed is that 
open-sourcing warp is the beginning, not the end of its lifecycle. 
There's a lot of improvements that are within easy reach for warp, and 
are easier to realize than for clang.

Andrei
Mar 31 2014
next sibling parent "Orvid King" <blah38621 gmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 31 March 2014 at 14:46:32 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu 
wrote:

 It's quite obvious. The D codebase is smaller and simpler than 
 clang pp's and can be taken many places; the next thing I'll 
 work on is multithreaded preprocessing that shares already 
 opened files. One thing that is self-evident but the article 
 could have stressed is that open-sourcing warp is the 
 beginning, not the end of its lifecycle. There's a lot of 
 improvements that are within easy reach for warp, and are 
 easier to realize than for clang.

 Andrei


We also have the ability to present it in a different use-case, 
pre-processing every header in one invocation, allowing warp to 
do some optimizations that Clang and GCC won't do, such as 
unconditional pre-processing (stripping comments and things such 
as #if 0 / #if 1, or conditions that are unconditionally met by 
things defined within the header, typically used to 
disable/enable certain code) because they would be of very 
limited use to GCC and Clang, which are typically invoked once 
for every source file. Warp could also offer the ability to pass 
certain #define's that are known to never be #undef'd by the 
source code (such as compiler capabilities / version 
identifications), allowing for more extensive unconditional 
pre-processing.
Mar 31 2014
prev sibling parent Leandro Lucarella <luca llucax.com.ar> writes:
Andrei Alexandrescu, el 31 de March a las 07:46 me escribiste:

 On 3/30/14, 5:01 PM, Leandro Lucarella wrote:

ixid, el 30 de March a las 20:04 me escribiste:

On Sunday, 30 March 2014 at 19:28:20 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:

On 3/30/2014 10:08 AM, Kagamin wrote:

On Friday, 28 March 2014 at 21:16:29 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:

It could be useful for me just this past week in a throw-away
D program that I
wrote (at work! :) ) to parse some C and C++ files very
crudely.


As I understand, a preprocessor works on macros only, the rest
is lexed minimally.


Yes, it won't help much with the rest.


Were those ycombinator performance figures putting warp someway
behind clang valid? Perhaps we should unleash a community effort to
match clang?


I think that's pretty wasteful, why won't you just use clang? What's the
point of competing with another opensource project (a very good one,
that took a lot of men-hour to do a good C/C++ compiler, including the
preprocessor). I understand Walter did this in a couple of weeks, clang
have been developed for at least 7 years now, is totally understandable
that clang outperforms warp, is enough merit for warp to outperform GCC.
I mean, if someone wants to have fun, go ahead, but putting community
effort on that where there are so many places that are more important to
put the effort on seems a bit silly.


 
 It's quite obvious. The D codebase is smaller and simpler than clang
 pp's and can be taken many places; the next thing I'll work on is
 multithreaded preprocessing that shares already opened files. One
 thing that is self-evident but the article could have stressed is
 that open-sourcing warp is the beginning, not the end of its
 lifecycle. There's a lot of improvements that are within easy reach
 for warp, and are easier to realize than for clang.


Honestly, I'm not so sure, Clang is modern and has been designed with
extensibility and performance from day 0. I think it will be quite hard
to compete with it and I wonder why are you willing to spend that much
effort instead of contributing to Clang. If you said that about GCC,
I could agree, but with Clang, at least for me, is harder to sell that
argument.

-- 
Leandro Lucarella (AKA luca)                     http://llucax.com.ar/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
MP: Cómo está, estimado Bellini?   B: Muy bien, Mario, astrologando.
MP: Qué tengo?                     B: Un balcón-terraza.
MP: No, en mi mano, Bellini...     B: Un secarropas!
MP: No, escuche bien, eh. Tiene    B: El circo de Moscú.
    números.
MP: No Bellini. Toma medidas.      B: Un ministro.
MP: No Bellini, eh! Algunas son    B: Una modelo, Mario!
    de plástico y otras de madera.
MP: No, Bellini, no y no!
	-- El Gran Bellini (Mario Podestá con una regla)
Mar 31 2014
prev sibling next sibling parent reply "w0rp" <devw0rp gmail.com> writes:
This is awesome news, congrats! I hadn't thought of the 
possibility of Walter doing some work for Facebook. Between this 
and the Oculus VR buyout, Facebook keeps doing interesting stuff. 
This should surely be good for D.
Mar 28 2014
parent "Meta" <jared771 gmail.com> writes:
On Friday, 28 March 2014 at 21:18:52 UTC, w0rp wrote:

 This is awesome news, congrats! I hadn't thought of the 
 possibility of Walter doing some work for Facebook. Between 
 this and the Oculus VR buyout, Facebook keeps doing interesting 
 stuff. This should surely be good for D.


If John Carmack is a Facebook employee, and D gains greater 
traction within Facebook, there is a real possibility that John 
Carmack might end up working in D for some small project, which 
would be a huge endorsement. He's already aware of it, at the 
very least, citing D's approach to purity in an old blog post.
Mar 28 2014
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe semitwist.com> writes:
On 3/28/2014 2:27 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

 Facebook is open-sourcing warp, a fast C and C++ preprocessor written by
 Walter Bright.

 http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/21m0bz/warp_a_fast_c_and_c_preprocessor/


Y'know, I've never been much of a fan of social networking sites, 
centralized/walled internet services, or being bombarded with 
"Find/like/etc us on Fb/Tw!" from every company around...*However*, 
regardless of my interest level in their flagship service, things like 
this and other D-related things (and also their new alternative-to-PHP 
language) are genuinely improving my opinion of Facebook as a company. 
Kudos!

(Note: *Not* intended as a backhanded-complement. Just the regular kind 
of complement.)
Mar 28 2014
parent =?UTF-8?B?QWxpIMOHZWhyZWxp?= <acehreli yahoo.com> writes:
On 03/28/2014 02:40 PM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:


 improving my opinion of Facebook as a company.
 Kudos!


Hearing that from you is proof enough that Facebook is playing it right. ;)

Ali
Mar 28 2014
prev sibling next sibling parent "Rikki Cattermole" <alphaglosined gmail.com> writes:
On Friday, 28 March 2014 at 18:27:17 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu 
wrote:

 Facebook is open-sourcing warp, a fast C and C++ preprocessor 
 written by Walter Bright.

 http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/21m0bz/warp_a_fast_c_and_c_preprocessor/

 https://news.ycombinator.com/newest

 https://twitter.com/fbOpenSource/status/449611378219679744

 https://www.facebook.com/dlang.org/posts/10202207506322611?stream_ref=10


 Andrei


All I can say is two things.
One I'm annoyed because I've been working on a macro preprocessor 
the last week or so and just got it up to supporting #if's anding 
and oring with defines.
Oh well.
Second great work on collaborating with Facebook. Definitely a 
great thing going on here!
Mar 28 2014
prev sibling parent reply dennis luehring <dl.soluz gmx.net> writes:
Am 28.03.2014 19:27, schrieb Andrei Alexandrescu:

 Facebook is open-sourcing warp, a fast C and C++ preprocessor written by
 Walter Bright.


currently any ideas why clang could be 40% faster?

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7489724
Mar 31 2014
parent "Tove" <tove fransson.se> writes:
On Monday, 31 March 2014 at 17:11:48 UTC, dennis luehring wrote:

 Am 28.03.2014 19:27, schrieb Andrei Alexandrescu:

 Facebook is open-sourcing warp, a fast C and C++ preprocessor 
 written by
 Walter Bright.


 currently any ideas why clang could be 40% faster?

 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7489724


SIMD and virtual-file-system?
Mar 31 2014