On Saturday, 25 August 2018 at 22:55:05 UTC, RhyS wrote:
On Saturday, 25 August 2018 at 12:16:06 UTC, Laeeth Isharc
wrote:
And yet some of the heaviest users of D have said in public
'please break our code". I wonder why that could be.
My answer to that is simply:
Break stuff so it becomes STABLE! Remove junk and clutter.
Do NOT break stuff to add more unneeded features inside a
rotten carcass.
Be honest, how many people will use BetterC in production! Not
as some homework or sided projects with a few dozen lines. Very
few and that is the issue ... That is development time that can
have gone into documentation, bug fixes...
I think you need to look at Dlang as what it is - still WIP and
mostly *community driven*.
I got used to the occasional breaking or regression, and the best
I can advise is to try to report or fix them if you can. There
are still lots of things to be removed/added/or fixed in the
language and the standard libraries - breakage will appear, and
looks that most users expect some kind of breakage.
As for DasBetterC, you might underestimate the potential it has
for migrating old C code fully of partially to D, or the nice
thing that it enabled Webassembly targeting.
But for me it is important in the way that it acted as a catalyst
for people to look at the issues Dlang and Druntime had, and made
them better by making them more modular. This is a win for Dlang
in the long run, maybe the betterC flag will be removed at some
point because the compiler and runtime will be smart enough to
enable pay-as-you-go intrinsically.
