On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 6:58 PM, Ary Borenszweig <[email protected]> wrote: > Tomas Lindquist Olsen wrote: >> >> On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 6:41 PM, Leandro Lucarella <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> >>> Tomas Lindquist Olsen, el 26 de marzo a las 18:18 me escribiste: >>>> >>>> On Thu, Mar 26, 2009 at 5:50 PM, Leandro Lucarella <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> ...snip... >>>>> >>>>> That's why I'd love to see some kind of D 1.1 (maybe LDC could be used >>>>> to >>>>> make an "unofficial" D 1.1 language), with a few minor non-breaking new >>>>> features over D 1.0, then D 1.2 could introduce some more, and so on. >>>>> This >>>>> way people can catch-up easly, with small simple iterations, and D1 >>>>> wont >>>>> feel as a dead frozen language. >>>> >>>> I think this is bound to happen sooner or later. >>> >>> Well, then I'd love it happen sooner ;) >> >> We could start by figuring out what D 1.1 is ... > > It's D2 - const/invariant, yeaaah! :-P >
Sounds a little drastic to me.
