Hi everyone,

LDC 1.1.0-beta2, the LLVM-based D compiler, is available for download!
This BETA release is based on the 2.071.1 frontend and standard library and supports LLVM 3.5-3.9.

We provide binaries for Linux, OX X, FreeBSD, Win32 & Win64, Linux/ARM (armv7hf), now bundled with DUB. :-)

As usual, you can find links to the changelog and the binary packages over at digitalmars.D.ldc:
http://forum.dlang.org/post/nskepdckljprrxsjbjyh@forum.dlang.org

Regards,
Kai

On Wednesday, 3 August 2016 at 20:12:59 UTC, Kai Nacke wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> LDC 1.1.0-beta2, the LLVM-based D compiler, is available for download!
> This BETA release is based on the 2.071.1 frontend and standard library and supports LLVM 3.5-3.9.
>
> We provide binaries for Linux, OX X, FreeBSD, Win32 & Win64, Linux/ARM (armv7hf), now bundled with DUB. :-)
>
> As usual, you can find links to the changelog and the binary packages over at digitalmars.D.ldc:
> http://forum.dlang.org/post/nskepdckljprrxsjbjyh@forum.dlang.org
>
> Regards,
> Kai

Great to see ldc catching up with dmd. :)

On Wednesday, 3 August 2016 at 20:12:59 UTC, Kai Nacke wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> LDC 1.1.0-beta2, the LLVM-based D compiler, is available for download!
> This BETA release is based on the 2.071.1 frontend and standard library and supports LLVM 3.5-3.9.
>
> We provide binaries for Linux, OX X, FreeBSD, Win32 & Win64, Linux/ARM (armv7hf), now bundled with DUB. :-)
>
> As usual, you can find links to the changelog and the binary packages over at digitalmars.D.ldc:
> http://forum.dlang.org/post/nskepdckljprrxsjbjyh@forum.dlang.org
>
> Regards,
> Kai

It should definitely be the reference compiler. Why they're wasting power with parallel compilers. :(

On Fri, Aug 5, 2016 at 3:28 AM, Emre Temelkuran via Digitalmars-d-announce < digitalmars-d-announce@puremagic.com> wrote:

> On Wednesday, 3 August 2016 at 20:12:59 UTC, Kai Nacke wrote:
>
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> LDC 1.1.0-beta2, the LLVM-based D compiler, is available for download! This BETA release is based on the 2.071.1 frontend and standard library and supports LLVM 3.5-3.9.
>>
>> We provide binaries for Linux, OX X, FreeBSD, Win32 & Win64, Linux/ARM
>> (armv7hf), now bundled with DUB. :-)
>>
>> As usual, you can find links to the changelog and the binary packages over at digitalmars.D.ldc: http://forum.dlang.org/post/nskepdckljprrxsjbjyh@forum.dlang.org
>>
>> Regards,
>> Kai
>>
>
> It should definitely be the reference compiler. Why they're wasting power with parallel compilers. :(
>

Its not wasting, diversity is important. The fact that the three "real" D compilers have pretty much the same language implementation is an important message to the world about our language. GDC is lagging because of man-power yes, but that does not mean we're wasting, it just means Ian could do with some more help :).

R

On Friday, 5 August 2016 at 06:13:54 UTC, Rory McGuire wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 5, 2016 at 3:28 AM, Emre Temelkuran via Digitalmars-d-announce < digitalmars-d-announce@puremagic.com> wrote:
>
>> On Wednesday, 3 August 2016 at 20:12:59 UTC, Kai Nacke wrote:
>>
>>> Hi everyone,
>>>
>>> LDC 1.1.0-beta2, the LLVM-based D compiler, is available for download! This BETA release is based on the 2.071.1 frontend and standard library and supports LLVM 3.5-3.9.
>>>
>>> We provide binaries for Linux, OX X, FreeBSD, Win32 & Win64, Linux/ARM
>>> (armv7hf), now bundled with DUB. :-)
>>>
>>> As usual, you can find links to the changelog and the binary packages over at digitalmars.D.ldc: http://forum.dlang.org/post/nskepdckljprrxsjbjyh@forum.dlang.org
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Kai
>>>
>>
>> It should definitely be the reference compiler. Why they're wasting power with parallel compilers. :(
>>
>
> Its not wasting, diversity is important. The fact that the three "real" D compilers have pretty much the same language implementation is an important message to the world about our language. GDC is lagging because of man-power yes, but that does not mean we're wasting, it just means Ian could do with some more help :).
>
> R

Definitely wasting. Have Rust and Go multiple compilers ?

On 5 August 2016 at 11:36, Temtaime via Digitalmars-d-announce <digitalmars-d-announce@puremagic.com> wrote:
> On Friday, 5 August 2016 at 06:13:54 UTC, Rory McGuire wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Aug 5, 2016 at 3:28 AM, Emre Temelkuran via Digitalmars-d-announce < digitalmars-d-announce@puremagic.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Wednesday, 3 August 2016 at 20:12:59 UTC, Kai Nacke wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi everyone,
>>>>
>>>> LDC 1.1.0-beta2, the LLVM-based D compiler, is available for download! This BETA release is based on the 2.071.1 frontend and standard library and supports LLVM 3.5-3.9.
>>>>
>>>> We provide binaries for Linux, OX X, FreeBSD, Win32 & Win64, Linux/ARM
>>>> (armv7hf), now bundled with DUB. :-)
>>>>
>>>> As usual, you can find links to the changelog and the binary packages over at digitalmars.D.ldc: http://forum.dlang.org/post/nskepdckljprrxsjbjyh@forum.dlang.org
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Kai
>>>>
>>>
>>> It should definitely be the reference compiler. Why they're wasting power with parallel compilers. :(
>>>
>>
>> Its not wasting, diversity is important. The fact that the three "real" D compilers have pretty much the same language implementation is an important message to the world about our language. GDC is lagging because of man-power yes, but that does not mean we're wasting, it just means Ian could do with some more help :).
>>
>> R
>
>
> Definitely wasting. Have Rust and Go multiple compilers ?

Yes, they do.

On Fri, Aug 5, 2016 at 11:36 AM, Temtaime via Digitalmars-d-announce < digitalmars-d-announce@puremagic.com> wrote:

> On Friday, 5 August 2016 at 06:13:54 UTC, Rory McGuire wrote:
>
>> On Fri, Aug 5, 2016 at 3:28 AM, Emre Temelkuran via Digitalmars-d-announce < digitalmars-d-announce@puremagic.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Wednesday, 3 August 2016 at 20:12:59 UTC, Kai Nacke wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi everyone,
>>>>
>>>> LDC 1.1.0-beta2, the LLVM-based D compiler, is available for download! This BETA release is based on the 2.071.1 frontend and standard library and supports LLVM 3.5-3.9.
>>>>
>>>> We provide binaries for Linux, OX X, FreeBSD, Win32 & Win64, Linux/ARM
>>>> (armv7hf), now bundled with DUB. :-)
>>>>
>>>> As usual, you can find links to the changelog and the binary packages over at digitalmars.D.ldc: http://forum.dlang.org/post/ns kepdckljprrxsjbjyh@forum.dlang.org
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>> Kai
>>>>
>>>>
>>> It should definitely be the reference compiler. Why they're wasting power with parallel compilers. :(
>>>
>>>
>> Its not wasting, diversity is important. The fact that the three "real" D compilers have pretty much the same language implementation is an important message to the world about our language. GDC is lagging because of man-power yes, but that does not mean we're wasting, it just means Ian could do with some more help :).
>>
>> R
>>
>
> Definitely wasting. Have Rust and Go multiple compilers ?
>

I disagree that it is wasting, however if I'm wrong then wasting is
important. Freedom to disagree and fork and the knowledge that there are
many LLVM developers, and many GCC developers etc, creates a sense of
stability and diversity in licensing and creativity.
Right now, you could go find some obscure gcc backend and start working on
getting gdc working with it. Or you could get LDC to work with some obscure
LLVM backend.

This creates opportunities for student thesis  (plural?)  and personal experimentation. They all have different implementations with different concepts and ideologies underlying them. Not everyone thinks the same way or processes information the same.

Programming is an art, having only one paint brush or one paint brush supplier would be weird for painters. The same goes for compilers and software devs.

R

On Friday, 5 August 2016 at 09:36:54 UTC, Temtaime wrote:
> Definitely wasting. Have Rust and Go multiple compilers ?

my K00l Ultimate Language has no compiler at all. so *ANY* compiler is "wasting". thanks for your perfect logic, this was what i missed in my arguments against writing compilers.

On Friday, 5 August 2016 at 01:28:39 UTC, Emre Temelkuran wrote:
> It should definitely be the reference compiler. Why they're wasting power with parallel compilers. :(

LLVM lags in windows support, and GDC can generate faster code and supports more architectures.

On Friday, 5 August 2016 at 12:22:05 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
> On Friday, 5 August 2016 at 01:28:39 UTC, Emre Temelkuran wrote:
>> It should definitely be the reference compiler. Why they're wasting power with parallel compilers. :(
>
> LLVM lags in windows support, and GDC can generate faster code and supports more architectures.

I *seriously* doubt GDC's Windows support is better than LDC's. ;) And comparing GDC/LDC to DMD is comparing apples to oranges due to the immense difference in backend/optimizer complexity and supported architectures.

The only missing biggie in LLVM for Windows right now is .pdb support (debuginfos), which is under active development. Apart from that, LLVM's Windows support is close to ideal, fitting nicely into the native MSVC toolchain (true for both clang and LDC).

I'd also argue that LDC can also generate faster code than GDC for some inputs. ;) I'd expect their performance to be more or less on par on average.