"Gor F. Gyolchanyan" <gor.f.gyolchan...@gmail.com> wrote in message news:j5ibrn$2rn8$1...@digitalmars.com... > Why don't you want D to have a backwards compatibility breaking release? > D2 got here, but D1 is still out there and gets it's occasional bug-fixes. > > Having a backwards compatibility breaking release is a good way to fix > mistakes, > made in the past. Not doing so leads to overly complicated and unintuitive > language like C++, where new functionality is crammed in with sacrifices > to > intuitiveness.
Basically, because D2 is not ready to be left behind yet. There are a huge number of compiler and library bugs to be fixed, hundreds of rough corners to be polished, and huge gaps in the toolchain to be fixed. To fork D again before these issues are better resolved would be catastrophic.
