On Sunday, 14 June 2015 at 11:33:52 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:
On Sunday, 14 June 2015 at 11:26:23 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad
wrote:
On Sunday, 14 June 2015 at 11:05:36 UTC, ketmar wrote:
p.s. i.e. it boils down to simple thing: Walter don't like
it. period.
any rationalizing of that is pointless.
The most sensible thing to do with all these may/may not be an
improvement and also the break/don't break my code issues is
to create an experimental branch of DMD after the transition
from C++ to D is finished. Then merge back the good stuff
after several iterations of improvement.
I'm sure Walter will be much more open to changes if there is
a proven demand for it, e.g. if people rave about certain
features in an experimental branch. Changing the main branch
with "might be a little bit better" changes is a hard sell
when competing languages are going stable.
Not all of them
http://www.reddit.com/r/rust/comments/39f2t7/planned_breaking_change_in_rust_11/
not really surprising considering rust was rushed out the door,
there were no breaks on that hype train.
