On 4/23/13 4:33 AM, eles wrote:
On Tuesday, 23 April 2013 at 07:52:20 UTC, Mehrdad wrote:
On Tuesday, 23 April 2013 at 07:50:44 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
I have raised this topic several times already. Stable version that
is guaranteed to never break user code
So what happens when a flaw in the language is fixed?
Do you fix it and break code, or do you leave it broken?
I am more for following the C/C++ solution: periodical revise the
language, but not every two months. Several years and once that the
compiler infrastructure is already in place and tested, publish
(officially) the new version.
During the meantime, users could live with workarounds and "forbidden to
do that!". Look at C and MISRA-C.
It won't help to declare a stable version of D, while keep adding new
things. What would really help is to stop adding new things, remove
those that we are in doubt if they are good or no (properties?) or, at
least, leave them as they are, then move towards improving the tools.
A cleaner language with better tools will allow D to take off, while
still leaving room for possible improvements in future revisions.
C++ did not start as a perfect language, nor it has become, still there
are tools for it, people are using it, companies are hiring C++ developers.
Being predictable does matter sometimes. Tools matter too.
I think we shouldn't follow the C++ model. Whatever made C++ successful
is not what'll make D successful. The context and expectations are very
different now.
Andrei
