Walter et al,

Maybe this topic has been covered but I would like to see your thoughts.

As I understand the situation there are only two developers working on the compiler and tools, or one developer if Jan is just a kind of cheering section.

It might be wise to start contemplating an open-source or semi-open source approach.  By semi-open I mean widening the circle of developers to a small handful, shy of divulging source to the public at large.

Either move would seem a wise tactic in light of human mortality and also your new work with this D language.  D will be a great tool, but advancement of the C++ tools will suffer because of it.

In commercial firms the decision of which compiler shall be used often hinges critically on the level of support and momentum behind it.  Open source projects have a lot more of that touchy-feely quality. Besides, we could help fix bugs!

Mark

Mark Evans wrote in message <1103_1001950809@evans>...
>Walter et al,
>Maybe this topic has been covered but I would like to see your thoughts.
>As I understand the situation there are only two developers working on the
compiler and tools, or one developer if Jan is just a kind of cheering section.
>It might be wise to start contemplating an open-source or semi-open source
approach.  By semi-open I mean widening the circle of developers to a small handful, shy of divulging source to the public at
>large.
>Either move would seem a wise tactic in light of human mortality and also
your new work with this D language.  D will be a great tool, but advancement of the C++ tools will suffer because of it.
>In commercial firms the decision of which compiler shall be used often
hinges critically on the level of support and momentum behind it.  Open source projects have a lot more of that touchy-feely quality.
>Besides, we could help fix bugs!


I'm strongly considering opening up more of the project to be open source. The library source is all available, and that was a big success.