https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wsj.com/amp/articles/apples-new-macs-how-theyll-work-after-ditching-intel-chips-11592862690

This means there's genuine interest in Arm. Note there's similar move by Microsoft to get their system to work on Arm chips.


PC was the only compelling target for Intel/Amd targets but now its changing.

On 6/24/20 7:21 AM, aberba wrote:
> https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wsj.com/amp/articles/apples-new-macs-how-theyll-work-after-ditching-intel-chips-11592862690 
> 
> 
> This means there's genuine interest in Arm. Note there's similar move by Microsoft to get their system to work on Arm chips.
> 
> 
> PC was the only compelling target for Intel/Amd targets but now its changing.

I was wondering about this. DMD I think only supports Intel, right? Are there any plans to support ARM, or will ldc/gdc be the only compilers that support Mac in the future?

I've used a mac since 2011, and I'm probably going to buy an Intel macbook this year before they are discontinued (my current one is from 2014), just to give myself more time to deal with it.

I'm curious to see how this will affect the Mac ecosystem.

-Steve

On Wednesday, 24 June 2020 at 12:56:26 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
> On 6/24/20 7:21 AM, aberba wrote:
>> https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wsj.com/amp/articles/apples-new-macs-how-theyll-work-after-ditching-intel-chips-11592862690
>> 
>> 
>> This means there's genuine interest in Arm. Note there's similar move by Microsoft to get their system to work on Arm chips.
>> 
>> 
>> PC was the only compelling target for Intel/Amd targets but now its changing.
>
> I was wondering about this. DMD I think only supports Intel, right? Are there any plans to support ARM, or will ldc/gdc be the only compilers that support Mac in the future?
They're saying the transition will take two yrs. Seems they're really serious about the move to Arm. Two yrs to get DMD to work on Arm. By then, there'll be dozens of other Windows PC's doing that.

>
> I've used a mac since 2011, and I'm probably going to buy an Intel macbook this year before they are discontinued (my current one is from 2014), just to give myself more time to deal with it.
>
> I'm curious to see how this will affect the Mac ecosystem.
>
> -Steve

I think others will join Apple in this move. Performance + power efficiency. Power efficiency more importantly as stated by Apple 🍎.

On Wednesday, 24 June 2020 at 14:54:16 UTC, aberba wrote:
> On Wednesday, 24 June 2020 at 12:56:26 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
>> On 6/24/20 7:21 AM, aberba wrote:
>>> https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wsj.com/amp/articles/apples-new-macs-how-theyll-work-after-ditching-intel-chips-11592862690
>>> 
>>> 
>>> This means there's genuine interest in Arm. Note there's similar move by Microsoft to get their system to work on Arm chips.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> PC was the only compelling target for Intel/Amd targets but now its changing.
>>
>> I was wondering about this. DMD I think only supports Intel, right? Are there any plans to support ARM, or will ldc/gdc be the only compilers that support Mac in the future?

There are _zero_ plans to make DMD work on ARM architectures. There are so many other actually impactful things to do ;-)

> They're saying the transition will take two yrs. Seems they're really serious about the move to Arm. Two yrs to get DMD to work on Arm.

To clarify and avoid confusion I see absolutely no reason anyone would waste this huge effort of time into getting DMD to work on ARM as there are two superior and working compiler backends and thus this won't be happening.

So yes you'll have to move away from DMD to LDC or GDC, but that shouldn't be a concern to anyone as even today with the amazing LDC team there's absolutely no reason to use DMD either. In fact I personally believe using DMD for production is irresponsible and at the very least should be strongly discouraged as mwe can't seem to convince the DFL/Walter to drop the DMD backend for obvious reasons.

Tl;Dr: it's just yet another nail in the coffin against DMD ...

On Wednesday, 24 June 2020 at 12:56:26 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
> On 6/24/20 7:21 AM, aberba wrote:
>> https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wsj.com/amp/articles/apples-new-macs-how-theyll-work-after-ditching-intel-chips-11592862690
>> 
>> 
>> This means there's genuine interest in Arm. Note there's similar move by Microsoft to get their system to work on Arm chips.
>> 
>> 
>> PC was the only compelling target for Intel/Amd targets but now its changing.
>
> I was wondering about this. DMD I think only supports Intel, right? Are there any plans to support ARM, or will ldc/gdc be the only compilers that support Mac in the future?
>

GCC still only supports powerpc, i386, or x86_64 darwin.  I imagine there'll be a little nudge in the direction of getting ARM support soon, but not during the current development cycle for 11.0

On Wed, Jun 24, 2020 at 04:27:27PM +0000, Seb via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On Wednesday, 24 June 2020 at 14:54:16 UTC, aberba wrote:
[...]
> > They're saying the transition will take two yrs. Seems they're really serious about the move to Arm. Two yrs to get DMD to work on Arm.

Why even bother, when LDC/GDC already support ARM (and have been for a
while now)?


> To clarify and avoid confusion I see absolutely no reason anyone would waste this huge effort of time into getting DMD to work on ARM as there are two superior and working compiler backends and thus this won't be happening.

Exactly.


> So yes you'll have to move away from DMD to LDC or GDC, but that shouldn't be a concern to anyone as even today with the amazing LDC team there's absolutely no reason to use DMD either. In fact I personally believe using DMD for production is irresponsible and at the very least should be strongly discouraged as mwe can't seem to convince the DFL/Walter to drop the DMD backend for obvious reasons.
> 
> Tl;Dr: it's just yet another nail in the coffin against DMD ...

To be fair, DMD does have amazingly fast compile times, which is very useful during development -- a fast turnaround *really* helps boost productivity during the code-compile-debug cycle.  I still use DMD for development of isolated modules / subsets of dependent modules because of this.

However, for production code, yeah, LDC is my first choice.  I'd still use DMD for non-critical code (if only due to pure laziness), like script-like programs and small utilities where program startup time dominates execution time.  But for anything that's even remotely performance-sensitive, I'd reach straight for LDC and not cast another glance at DMD.


T

-- 
Obviously, some things aren't very obvious.

On 6/24/20 12:40 PM, Iain Buclaw wrote:
> On Wednesday, 24 June 2020 at 12:56:26 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
>> On 6/24/20 7:21 AM, aberba wrote:
>>> https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wsj.com/amp/articles/apples-new-macs-how-theyll-work-after-ditching-intel-chips-11592862690 
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> This means there's genuine interest in Arm. Note there's similar move by Microsoft to get their system to work on Arm chips.
>>>
>>>
>>> PC was the only compelling target for Intel/Amd targets but now its changing.
>>
>> I was wondering about this. DMD I think only supports Intel, right? Are there any plans to support ARM, or will ldc/gdc be the only compilers that support Mac in the future?
>>
> 
> GCC still only supports powerpc, i386, or x86_64 darwin.  I imagine there'll be a little nudge in the direction of getting ARM support soon, but not during the current development cycle for 11.0
> 

Surely you mean GDC, not GCC?

-Steve

On Wednesday, 24 June 2020 at 17:19:00 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
> On 6/24/20 12:40 PM, Iain Buclaw wrote:
>> On Wednesday, 24 June 2020 at 12:56:26 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
>>> On 6/24/20 7:21 AM, aberba wrote:
>>>> https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.wsj.com/amp/articles/apples-new-macs-how-theyll-work-after-ditching-intel-chips-11592862690
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> This means there's genuine interest in Arm. Note there's similar move by Microsoft to get their system to work on Arm chips.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> PC was the only compelling target for Intel/Amd targets but now its changing.
>>>
>>> I was wondering about this. DMD I think only supports Intel, right? Are there any plans to support ARM, or will ldc/gdc be the only compilers that support Mac in the future?
>>>
>> 
>> GCC still only supports powerpc, i386, or x86_64 darwin.  I imagine there'll be a little nudge in the direction of getting ARM support soon, but not during the current development cycle for 11.0
>> 
>
> Surely you mean GDC, not GCC?
>

GDC only enforces that language semantics are adhered to.  It's GCC (back-end) that takes care of the target support.  I imagine library support in druntime should mostly be there, as LDC already has LLVM support for arm-darwin.

On 6/24/20 4:16 PM, Iain Buclaw wrote:
> On Wednesday, 24 June 2020 at 17:19:00 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
>> On 6/24/20 12:40 PM, Iain Buclaw wrote:
>>> GCC still only supports powerpc, i386, or x86_64 darwin.  I imagine there'll be a little nudge in the direction of getting ARM support soon, but not during the current development cycle for 11.0
>>>
>>
>> Surely you mean GDC, not GCC?
>>
> 
> GDC only enforces that language semantics are adhered to.  It's GCC (back-end) that takes care of the target support.  I imagine library support in druntime should mostly be there, as LDC already has LLVM support for arm-darwin.

Sorry, I think I was confused, I thought you meant that GCC cannot target ARM, but I think now you mean ARM on darwin?

-Steve

On Wednesday, 24 June 2020 at 16:27:27 UTC, Seb wrote:
> There are _zero_ plans to make DMD work on ARM architectures. There are so many other actually impactful things to do ;-)
>
>> They're saying the transition will take two yrs. Seems they're really serious about the move to Arm. Two yrs to get DMD to work on Arm.
>
> To clarify and avoid confusion I see absolutely no reason anyone would waste this huge effort of time into getting DMD to work on ARM as there are two superior and working compiler backends and thus this won't be happening.
>
> So yes you'll have to move away from DMD to LDC or GDC, but that shouldn't be a concern to anyone as even today with the amazing LDC team there's absolutely no reason to use DMD either. In fact I personally believe using DMD for production is irresponsible and at the very least should be strongly discouraged as mwe can't seem to convince the DFL/Walter to drop the DMD backend for obvious reasons.
>
> Tl;Dr: it's just yet another nail in the coffin against DMD ...

I somewhat agree, but if we look at the lengths that the Rust project has gone to to optimize compile times (and people still complain often about them), we should not completely discount the advantage that dmd offers.