[DGD] 1.3.8

[Felix A. Croes]

Petter Nystrom <jimorie at gmail.com> wrote:

> Yes, very welcome!
>
> Here is one user that wouldn't mind less conservatism and more sugar.
> But it's all good.

There are good reasons to keep LPC a slim language, though.  It simplifies
maintenance (with statedumps, atomic rollback and MP the runtime support
is becoming quite complex), it is better for LPC as a target language
(important since compilation from LPC is the only way to get VM code)
and it makes future changes easier (for example, if I were to decide to
replace the VM with a well-supported open source one, with lots of JIT
and optimizer goodness).

Regrds,
Felix Croes