Is DMD 0.166 RC 1.0?

[Bruno Medeiros]

Walter Bright wrote:
> Bruno Medeiros wrote:
>> Walter Bright wrote:
>>> Any compelling reason why not? I know that everyone (including me) 
>>> wants more features, more improvements, etc., but nothing about 
>>> calling it 1.0 will prevent that from happening.
>>
>> Something I've been wondering: "but nothing about calling it 1.0 will 
>> prevent that from happening." But then what is the point of calling a 
>> 1.0 , will there be a branch or some other effect? Or it's just 
>> marketing?
> 
> It's simply a stake in the ground. I want to get past the "it's not 
> usable because it's not 1.0" first impressions people sometimes write.

I'm a bit at a loss.
A given version can mean:
"usable" - good enough to be used for actual work.
"completed/finished" - all major known problems and changes have been 
resolved, as well as most of the minor ones. (it doesn't mean the 
program is final, there can be *new* additions of course.)

So, you're not asking what D needs in order to be considered 
"completed/finished", but rather if D is "usable"? You're asking if D 
(.166) is usable?
Or rather, are you asking if the "1.0" label should be used to mean 
that, rather than to mean "completed/finished"?


-- 
Bruno Medeiros - MSc in CS/E student
http://www.prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?BrunoMedeiros#D