The last one:

https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/6310

ACHIEVEMENT UNLOCKED!

On Thursday, 15 December 2016 at 01:04:54 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
> The last one:
>
> https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/6310

Great!  I see you've started moving the backend to D too, about 5% done so far.

How far do you plan to go in bringing D idioms to the compiler itself?  A simple grep shows 3 C-style `for` loops in the frontend for every D `foreach`.  Do you plan on using ranges and algorithms, which likely means relying on Phobos at some point?  Any plans to turn on the GC someday?  Please enlighten us on your roadmap for how far you want to take the D conversion process.

On 12/14/2016 7:21 PM, Joakim wrote:
> How far do you plan to go in bringing D idioms to the compiler itself?  A simple
> grep shows 3 C-style `for` loops in the frontend for every D `foreach`.  Do you
> plan on using ranges and algorithms, which likely means relying on Phobos at
> some point?  Any plans to turn on the GC someday?  Please enlighten us on your
> roadmap for how far you want to take the D conversion process.

I plan to go eventually all the way. But it really needs to be 100% D first.

On Thursday, 15 December 2016 at 05:03:20 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
> On 12/14/2016 7:21 PM, Joakim wrote:
>> How far do you plan to go in bringing D idioms to the compiler itself?  A simple
>> grep shows 3 C-style `for` loops in the frontend for every D `foreach`.  Do you
>> plan on using ranges and algorithms, which likely means relying on Phobos at
>> some point?  Any plans to turn on the GC someday?  Please enlighten us on your
>> roadmap for how far you want to take the D conversion process.
>
> I plan to go eventually all the way. But it really needs to be 100% D first.

Please, no :-(
Mir needs betterC DMD FE

On Thursday, 15 December 2016 at 01:04:54 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
> The last one:
>
> https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/6310


Wow! That *is* something!
Great news and well-done!

On Thursday, 15 December 2016 at 05:53:42 UTC, Ilya Yaroshenko wrote:
>
> Please, no :-(
> Mir needs betterC DMD FE

What for ?
Are you using the compiler frontend ?
And the frontend is not only using the betterC subset.
So you could not be using it right now.

On Thursday, 15 December 2016 at 13:46:36 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote:
> On Thursday, 15 December 2016 at 05:53:42 UTC, Ilya Yaroshenko wrote:
>>
>> Please, no :-(
>> Mir needs betterC DMD FE
>
> What for ?
> Are you using the compiler frontend ?
> And the frontend is not only using the betterC subset.
> So you could not be using it right now.

Yes, I hope I will be able to use ldc/gdc on new targets, which do not have DRuntime.

On Thursday, 15 December 2016 at 14:14:41 UTC, Ilya Yaroshenko wrote:
> On Thursday, 15 December 2016 at 13:46:36 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote:
>> On Thursday, 15 December 2016 at 05:53:42 UTC, Ilya Yaroshenko wrote:
>>>
>>> Please, no :-(
>>> Mir needs betterC DMD FE
>>
>> What for ?
>> Are you using the compiler frontend ?
>> And the frontend is not only using the betterC subset.
>> So you could not be using it right now.
>
> Yes, I hope I will be able to use ldc/gdc on new targets, which do not have DRuntime.

There is nothing wrong with dmd then.
Most of the code related to -betterC is in the glue code which means you need to bug the ldc and gdc devs. Either way, if they don't have a working druntime don't expect codegen to be valid for said target.

On Thursday, 15 December 2016 at 14:40:55 UTC, Rikki Cattermole wrote:
> On Thursday, 15 December 2016 at 14:14:41 UTC, Ilya Yaroshenko wrote:
>> On Thursday, 15 December 2016 at 13:46:36 UTC, Stefan Koch wrote:
>>> On Thursday, 15 December 2016 at 05:53:42 UTC, Ilya Yaroshenko wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Please, no :-(
>>>> Mir needs betterC DMD FE
>>>
>>> What for ?
>>> Are you using the compiler frontend ?
>>> And the frontend is not only using the betterC subset.
>>> So you could not be using it right now.
>>
>> Yes, I hope I will be able to use ldc/gdc on new targets, which do not have DRuntime.
>
> There is nothing wrong with dmd then.
> Most of the code related to -betterC is in the glue code which means you need to bug the ldc and gdc devs. Either way, if they don't have a working druntime don't expect codegen to be valid for said target.

If  DMD FE is a betterC library, then DRuntime is not required to build a betterC D program with LDC/GCC, is no it?