dmd 1.043 alpha for FreeBSD 7.1

[Walter Bright]

Jarrett Billingsley wrote:
> Out of all the arguments put forth so far, I think this is the
> strongest.  OSX is just the name of Apple's 10th Mac OS.  Why would we
> have version(OSX), but not version(WinXP), version(WinVista),
> version(LinuxUbuntuGutsy) etc. etc. etc.?

Predicting what Apple (or anyone else) will name their next OS is a 
waste of time. They'll do what they do, and D will try to make an 
appropriate accommodation.

The reason why there is no WinXP is because people expect their windows 
apps to run on the gamut of windows versions, and if you're writing code 
dependent on a particular version of windows, you should do a runtime 
check for it (like is done in std.file). The same goes for Linux.

Apple's OSs, on the other hand, do not engender an expectation to work 
that way. The fact that if you compile a "hello world" program in C 
using the default switches on OSX 10.5 produces a "bus error" when run 
on 10.4 illustrates a very different world from what I'm used to. As 
Apple upgrades OSX, I don't know what to expect. We'll see.