Steven Schveighoffer wrote: > "Jason House" wrote >> Walter Bright wrote: >> >>> Druntime is there, and it's up to the Tango team now. >> >> As I understand it, the biggest fear of the Tango team is to make an >> official D2 version and then have to chase after a moving standard. If >> an official port of Tango 0.99.7 was ported to work with dmd v2.023 how >> willing would you be to ensure that the D2 Tango was functional prior to >> new releases of dmd? I don't necessarily mean that you personally hack >> at Tango D2 for every release with breaking changes but rather that you >> have people lined up to compile and run unit tests, and fix problems >> prior to each release? > > As far as I know, Walter has stated that he is willing to issue a quick > fix > release for easily fixed bugs that hurt Tango. This already happens with > the D1 releases, and I'm sure he'd extend that courtesy for D2 releases > once > Tango D2 is relatively stable. I agree with Walter that the ball is fully > in Tango's court. > > D2 not being stable is probably the largest reason that most of the Tango > devs aren't yet interested, but it doesn't stop some of us from trying :) > Probably the largest hurdle right now is const-ifying all of Tango. Most > of the time, this doesn't just imply slapping a const or immutable label > on something, but really rethinking how a particular module is implemented > to > cater to const properly. Thankfully, however, const is now a stable > target. Once pure/shared/unshared gets introduced, it will probably > require more effort, but probably not as much as with const.
There is also the question of how SafeD should be catered for. -- Lars Ivar Igesund blog at http://larsivi.net DSource, #d.tango & #D: larsivi Dancing the Tango