"David Nadlinger" <s...@klickverbot.at> wrote in message news:mwkwqttkbdpmzvyvi...@forum.dlang.org... > On Saturday, 11 May 2013 at 17:10:51 UTC, Daniel Murphy wrote: >> If you decide that all later versions of the compiler must compile with >> all >> earlier versions of phobos, then those phobos modules are unable to >> change. > > In (the rare) case of breaking changes, we could always work around them > in the compiler source (depending on __VERSION__), rather than duplicating > everything up-front. > > I believe *this* is the nice middle ground. > > David
That... doesn't sound very nice to me. How much of phobos are we realistically going to need?
