Jason House wrote:
Walter Bright Wrote:
If there's more I can do to make this work, I would like to know
what that is.
I know D does not burden itself with backwards compatibility,
That's not quite correct. I have strongly resisted any changes to D2
that would *silently* break programs. The breaking changes elicit clear
messages from the compiler.
but the
lack of compatibility has to affect many D projects. There are many
D1-only projects that can't be used within D2. When D3 is started,
will we have even more incompatible choices? I have no solution to
this issue, but it deserves some thought.
In the past, I proposed the idea of forward compatibility which would
allow a D1 compiler to ignore D2-specific keywords and other minor
semantic differences such as invariant()... The idea wasn't 100%
compatibility, but rather to allow writing a reasonable subset of D2
that could compile in D1. Maybe a 3rd party tool to do the
translation is enough?
The problem is that creates a third language.
