The question in the prompted from this bear post: bearophile wrote: > Andrej Mitrovic: > >> I don't understand it either. AFAIK they are being removed because >> they're unsafe, and are being replaced by an unsafe library solution. > > I have hated see typedef and scoped classes go (I have even missed > delete), but you need a bit of faith in the future and in Andrei & > Walter. Andrei is not evil, and he's smart. D2 language is a very > young language, and when a built-in feature looks not perfect, it's > better to remove it now. If you remove it, you will have plenty of > time in future to add it back, add something better implementation of > it, or to find a better and very different solution, or even to add a > more general language feature that allows you to implement the > original half-broken feature in library code. While if something > badly designed is left in the language, then you are struck with it > forever, or almost forever. Generally in language it's 10-100 times > simpler to add a new feature than to remove it :-) Better to start > with a not complete D2 language, a language with holes waiting to be > filled, that with a language with unfixable warts that you may "fix" > just adding another better feature and pretending the old one doesn't > exist any more (example: nullptr of C++0x).
Will D ever get to a true 1.0 release? If so, when? Specifying 1.0 and 2.0 seems rather gratuitous (or typos?). More appropriate may indeed be 0.1 and 0.2. All the hand-waving about this great new automobile, yet it has no wheels, or square ones!
