On Sat, 2014-03-15 at 21:08 -0700, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: […] > I believe this is a bridge we do need to cross. One question is how we > go about it: all at once, or gradually?
Given that it is a breaking change, the sooner the better and as much of it at once as possible. Perhaps changing the numbering system to loose the leading insignificant 0 as well. If D is to get into the "no breaking change during minor releases and bugfix releases", then all the breaking changes to Dv2 need to be done now if they are to happen to Dv2, otherwise they have to wait for Dv3. Java is the example of the mess that happens when you commit to no breaking changes. It is hugely irritating for "early adopter" types. Once the "if it ain't broke don't touch it" types get involved evolution becomes a Java like activity :-( -- Russel. ============================================================================= Dr Russel Winder t: +44 20 7585 2200 voip: sip:russel.win...@ekiga.net 41 Buckmaster Road m: +44 7770 465 077 xmpp: rus...@winder.org.uk London SW11 1EN, UK w: www.russel.org.uk skype: russel_winder
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
