Re: Any plans to fix Issue 9044? aka Language stability question again

2013-06-03 Thread Denis Shelomovskij

25.05.2013 14:07, Denis Shelomovskij пишет:

As those of you who do write some non-toy projects in D know, from time
to time you projects become unbuildable because of Issue 9044 [1] an you
have to juggle with files and randomly copy/move functions from one
library to another to detrigger the issue creating mess marked Issue
9044 workaround. It become really annoying when your one-file project
using an external library fails as it forcing you to juggle with that
library files (e.g. VisualD's `cpp2d` project which triggers the issue
randomly).

I'd never complain about such things but the language is tend to be
self-called stable by main maintainers and I'd like to finally see an
official definition of this stability as it obviously contradicts my
personal very loyal definition (e.g. I have noting against breaking
changes if they are in good direction).


[1] http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9044



So now the issue is marked as duplicate of Issue 6461 [1].

The issue have no votes. There is no official answers about when it will 
be fixed. Am I the only one who meet it in almost every project at least 
at age about dozen days of development?


[1] http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6461

--
Денис В. Шеломовский
Denis V. Shelomovskij


Re: Any plans to fix Issue 9044? aka Language stability question again

2013-06-03 Thread Walter Bright

On 6/3/2013 8:40 AM, Denis Shelomovskij wrote:

25.05.2013 14:07, Denis Shelomovskij пишет:

As those of you who do write some non-toy projects in D know, from time
to time you projects become unbuildable because of Issue 9044 [1] an you
have to juggle with files and randomly copy/move functions from one
library to another to detrigger the issue creating mess marked Issue
9044 workaround. It become really annoying when your one-file project
using an external library fails as it forcing you to juggle with that
library files (e.g. VisualD's `cpp2d` project which triggers the issue
randomly).

I'd never complain about such things but the language is tend to be
self-called stable by main maintainers and I'd like to finally see an
official definition of this stability as it obviously contradicts my
personal very loyal definition (e.g. I have noting against breaking
changes if they are in good direction).


[1] http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9044



So now the issue is marked as duplicate of Issue 6461 [1].

The issue have no votes. There is no official answers about when it will be
fixed. Am I the only one who meet it in almost every project at least at age
about dozen days of development?

[1] http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=6461



I'm sorry about that one, but I am too swamped to work on it at the moment. 
Please, keep bugging me about it.


Any plans to fix Issue 9044? aka Language stability question again

2013-05-25 Thread Denis Shelomovskij
As those of you who do write some non-toy projects in D know, from time 
to time you projects become unbuildable because of Issue 9044 [1] an you 
have to juggle with files and randomly copy/move functions from one 
library to another to detrigger the issue creating mess marked Issue 
9044 workaround. It become really annoying when your one-file project 
using an external library fails as it forcing you to juggle with that 
library files (e.g. VisualD's `cpp2d` project which triggers the issue 
randomly).


I'd never complain about such things but the language is tend to be 
self-called stable by main maintainers and I'd like to finally see an 
official definition of this stability as it obviously contradicts my 
personal very loyal definition (e.g. I have noting against breaking 
changes if they are in good direction).



[1] http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=9044

--
Денис В. Шеломовский
Denis V. Shelomovskij


Re: Any plans to fix Issue 9044? aka Language stability question again

2013-05-25 Thread eles
On Saturday, 25 May 2013 at 10:07:29 UTC, Denis Shelomovskij 
wrote:


obviously contradicts my personal very loyal definition (e.g. I 
have noting against breaking changes if they are in good 
direction).


I very much like this definition.