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