DMD 1.032 and 2.016 releases

[Sean Kelly]

Walter Bright wrote:
> Sean Kelly wrote:
>> But it's a breaking change that people asked for two years ago, before 
>> D 2.0 was announced.  Besides, breaking changes are made to D 1.0 all 
>> the time anyway, as evidenced by the fact that all of the past 4 DMD 
>> 1.x releases have broken Tango in one way or another.  I grant that, 
>> as a silent breaking change this is somewhat of a bigger deal, but I 
>> suspect that our users would gladly change their code to have this in 
>> 1.0.
> 
> Creating a spec-changing breaking change for D 1.0 is not its charter, 
> which is to be a stable release of D that is not getting breaking spec 
> changes.

So basically, even if bug reports were opened against D 1.0 before D 1.0 
was finalized, if fixing them involves a breaking change then we'll 
never see them in D 1.0.  Is this correct?

On a related note, there were some other issues fixed in D 2.0 but not 
1.0 that I don't believe were spec-related and which were also reported 
against 1.0 before 2.0 was announced.  I can't recall what they were 
offhand... IFTI issues perhaps?  What was the reasoning behind this 
decision?


Sean