April 13, 2012
On Thursday, 12 April 2012 at 06:46:53 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
> I'm pretty sure that the JSON output can _never_ be enough for what we want to do.

I agree with that, nothing will quite be the same as a full compiler-as-a-library (CAAL?). But in the meantime, there is a working compiler now, and isn't it better to get some kind of IDE-like functionality sooner rather than waiting for a long time with nothing?
April 13, 2012
On 2012-04-13 06:50, Matt Peterson wrote:
> On Thursday, 12 April 2012 at 06:46:53 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
>> I'm pretty sure that the JSON output can _never_ be enough for what we
>> want to do.
>
> I agree with that, nothing will quite be the same as a full
> compiler-as-a-library (CAAL?). But in the meantime, there is a working
> compiler now, and isn't it better to get some kind of IDE-like
> functionality sooner rather than waiting for a long time with nothing?

When you say "there is a working compiler now", which on is you referring to. DMD, LDC, GDC, SDC or any other? As far as I know neither DMD, LDC or GDC is usable as a library. I have no experience of SDC and don't know in what state it is.

But I guess we would have to do some investigation and figure out what the best to do this would be.

BTW, there are already IDE's with some kind of frontends available. MonoD, VisualD, Descent (now old) and possibly others.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg
April 13, 2012
* Jacob Carlborg <doob@me.com> [2012-04-13 08:40:39 +0200]:
> On 2012-04-13 06:50, Matt Peterson wrote:
> >I agree with that, nothing will quite be the same as a full compiler-as-a-library (CAAL?). But in the meantime, there is a working compiler now, and isn't it better to get some kind of IDE-like functionality sooner rather than waiting for a long time with nothing?
> 
> When you say "there is a working compiler now", which on is you referring to. DMD, LDC, GDC, SDC or any other? As far as I know neither DMD, LDC or GDC is usable as a library. I have no experience of SDC and don't know in what state it is.
> 
> But I guess we would have to do some investigation and figure out what the best to do this would be.
> 
> BTW, there are already IDE's with some kind of frontends available. MonoD, VisualD, Descent (now old) and possibly others.

I think he means that while there isn't a suitable "CaaL", there are working compilers that can be improved to supply enough information to atleast start on IDE integration, even if it isn't as robust or efficient as an actual library.

>From what I can tell, LDC would probably be the best for the kind of
code analysis an IDE would need, since it is has an LLVM backend. SDC would be good too, but SDC is probably the best one to try to move towards adding this functionality.

--
James Miller
April 13, 2012
On 2012-04-13 11:28, James Miller wrote:

> I think he means that while there isn't a suitable "CaaL", there are
> working compilers that can be improved to supply enough information to
> atleast start on IDE integration, even if it isn't as robust or
> efficient as an actual library.
>
>> From what I can tell, LDC would probably be the best for the kind of
> code analysis an IDE would need, since it is has an LLVM backend. SDC
> would be good too, but SDC is probably the best one to try to move
> towards adding this functionality.
>
> --
> James Miller

I don't know if it would be much difference between LDC, GDC and DMD since they all use the same frontend. And it's the frontend that is the most important part, not the backend.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg
1 2 3 4
Next ›   Last »