On Wednesday, 28 November 2012 at 02:29:12 UTC, bearophile wrote:
It will take some more years to see D2 "stabilized" like that.
The decision to discontinue D1 has some disadvantages, but
keeping D1 updated uses some work time that could be (better)
spent improving D2.
With that kind of attitude D2 will never stabilize.
I remember two years ago I was told that once TDPL was published,
the language would become stable. Two years later everything is
just as in flux as it was back then. The welcome fixation of bugs
is befouled with deliberate code breakage left and right. There
is absolutely no guarantee of backwards compatibility between DMD
versions. This situation is simply unheard of. Vast majority of
respectable software inititives provide a stable version that
guarantees source and possibly binary compatibility, and an
unstable version that does not. They use versioning schemes where
a match of some part of the version number assures compatibility.
Is there absolutely no concern for D users's code? It certainly
seems like it. Maybe it would have made sense a decade ago when D
was just starting... but D has been around for over 11 years now.
To have screwed up so badly that after 11 years you still don't
have a stable platform to write code for (well, you do with D1,
but in a month there will not be that excuse) is mind boggling.
