State of D 2018 Survey

psychoticRabbit meagain at meagain.com
Fri Mar 2 00:39:08 UTC 2018


On Thursday, 1 March 2018 at 21:49:31 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
>
> That being said, I think that it's a given that we need to make 
> breaking changes at least occasionally. The question is more 
> how big they can be and how we go about it. Some changes would 
> clearly be far too large to be worth it, whereas others clearly 
> pay for themselves. The harder question is the stuff in between.
>
> ...
> - Jonathan M Davis

Personally. I think the D1..D2 transistion was great idea.

I think D2..D3 should follow the same principle.

i.e restrict breaking changes to major versions.

People are always able to stay on the major branch that they need 
- there are no forced upgrades here - you choose which major 
branch works for you. The source code is all there for you, to do 
as you please.

This is the only way to evolve - otherwise D will just become 
another convoluted piece of %3 at f!, like C++.

On the otherhand, I wish programming languages would just stop 
changing so often.

The constant release cycles is just crazy! That's a sure sign 
that something is not right. And who wants to program in a 
langauge that is not right??

That's why I still like, still use, and typically still prefer .. 
C.

Nobody dares change it ;-)




More information about the Digitalmars-d-announce mailing list