Walter Bright wrote:
Steve Teale wrote:
This is the sort of answer that will kill D. The guy comes back after
2 years, asks a straight question, and get's told "business as usual,
we're still arguing among ourselves about what it should be".
Maybe Tiobe is right! Lots of others may not even bother to ask. They
just visit the newsgroup, read a page of it, and conclude "same old,
same old", and go away.
D should be D, not maybe 1.043, or let's wait a while and see what
happens with D2. Potential real users hate uncertainty. If they are
going to commit, then D must do so too.
What bothers me about this sentiment is that every other mainstream
language undergoes revision, sometimes major ones, but that never seems
to be an excuse for people to not use it.
For example, C++ is quite in flux with C++0x.
The only languages that are not undergoing revision are dead ones.
But C++ programs still compile and run correctly with C++0x compilers. I
bet none of the projects on dsource are even compilable with dmd2 (even
if they were written for D2.0). And _many_ projects probably need minor
fixes, before they compile with the latest dmd1 compiler.
