>> Do you have plans to incorportae this as a VisualD project .csproj project since it's already intended to be microsoft oriented? (It would seem like a good fit to me.) That way you could even take away the mixin code and the "running the main method" code. >> > > I do not since I wouldn't know where to start, but it's possible. > This is an interesting ideal Visual D already provides a D injection in to C++ projects. Using DLangInNet(I'm renamed your project for you ;) one should be able to add D code in to a C#, F#, C++, VB, or any .net compatible project. You should talk to Rainer about this. It shouldn't be all that difficult to do since C#'s PInvoke does all the real work. I assume DLangInNet just generates a C# equivalent that forwards all the calls to the D code using Pinvoke when necessary? So the idea is that one can add .d files to .Net projects, when built: 1. The D files are compiled. 2. DInNet runs on the D code and generates the C# output(could be modified for many other lannguages such as python, F#, Haskell, etc). Basically an autobinding generator from D to whatever, might be a good project to develop. 3. .Net handles the rest. The point of having it this way in Visual Studio is that one can on a single project that has many different languages involved and can setup a rather seamless connection. This allows one to tailor the program design to the language of choice. E.g., D for performance, C++ for barebones, C# for gui, F# for structure, etc. This could be used for Unity, say, for using D in algorithms. Such a feature would attract far more users and give D a boost in it's userbase and more will get done. What we need is an idea that just works and one can use any appropriate source language at any time and they all bind without hicup's in most cases. One can easily update all the compilers at a click and unwind if any compiler fails to build a project, etc. So much more could be done. But a start would be getting some of these different zones(e.g., languages, 3D engines, compilers, etc) to all work seamlessly in an integrated fashion. E.g., something along the lines of: 1. Pick your language's 2. Pick your rendering engine 3. Pick your standard library 4. Pick your extensions And so one can mix and match all things and everything just connects together. E.g., your python file will "intellisense" with your D file. Write a function in Haskell and it is callable in VB which can be called by your python file. of course, this would suggest that there is just one underlying language and many "versions"(mappings) on top... which is basically IR with .NET. I'm just thinking grander and not having to write a new compiler... just using bindings and wrapper generators to generate the code. Since most languages use object files and pretty much follow the same basic principles, it probably could be done for most things needed by most people. One would just have to come up with the proper design so that people could build on it and connect languages in to the ecosystem easily. This is the direction in which IDE's are headed but I don't think they realize it yet. It seems it wouldn't be all that much work either. Essentially one just maintains a list of "exportable" symbols for each language source, project, module, etc and all other language sources can see them. E.g., write a public global function or variable in D, say, and it is automatically exported which can then be seen in any other language source. Proper interaction will be chosen and everything will just work. This would be like being able to speak 10 languages nearly simultaneously! With such an IDE it could even deal with Marshalling and seg faulting issues such as apply warnings when a variable should be free'd when it is interopted with and the IDE knows it should(e.g., D and C++ issues) or whatever. (People would be able to write such rules so that errors could be minimized)