On Monday, October 17, 2011 11:37 simendsjo wrote: > On 17.10.2011 20:24, Jonathan M Davis wrote: > > There is code in druntime and Phobos which special-cases for Windows 98 > > and earlier (e.g. std.file using the A functions instead of the W > > functions if the version of Windows that you're running on is too old to > > have the W functions). Now, personally, I would love it if we just said > > that you have to have at least Win2k if not WinXP. It would be_great_ > > to be able to assume at least Vista, since it added a number of useful > > functions, but XP is still too prevalent for that to be reasonable. > > Regardless, supporting older versions of Windows is just plain > > irritating, since it restricts what you can do, and D is new enough and > > Win2k old enough that I find it perfectly reasonable to insist that you > > have WinXP or newer, but that's not what we're doing at this point. > > I'm not even sure W2K support is in great demand. Even XP is on a strong > downwards slope, and Win7 has a greater share of the market now. XP is > still needed for several years, but Win98...? When was the last time > anyone encountered Win98? Does anyone even make software with Win98 > support anymore? > I doubt D looses any market share by ditching support for operating > systems that doesn't even have vendor support. If it restricts usage on > newer operating systems I'm in favor of dropping it, but I guess there's > a good reason why Win98 is supported (or just legacy from 10 years back..?)
There have been bug reports on it (so someone is using D with Windows 98), and Walter seems to think that D should run on as much as it possibly can. So, it looks like until we have a solid reason why we _can't_ reasonably support Windows 98, we're going to. - Jonathan M Davis
