State of D 2018 Survey

[Russel Winder]

On Sun, 2018-03-04 at 21:12 +0000, Kagamin via Digitalmars-d-announce
wrote:
> On Friday, 2 March 2018 at 12:01:33 UTC, Russel Winder wrote:
> > So having D2.999 is fine per se, but advertises a lack of 
> > change and a lack of ambition since the language name is D not 
> > D2.
> 
> D just doesn't follow semver. If it did, we would have D79 now, 
> nothing else even comes close to this. And I suspect it won't 
> adopt semver because major number would be so ridiculously high 
> and will advertize something else.

I do not see your reasoning here. Has the core D computational model
changed? I think not. Does D issue bugfix releases? Occasionally. Thus:

2.79.0

seems like a perfectly reasonable semantic version number for D.

> > Fortran, C++, and Java show an obsessive adherence to backward 
> > compatibility and yet they increase their major numbers to give 
> > the appearance at least of forward progress.
> 
> C++ and Fortran don't have version numbers, those are brand 
> numbers.

Actually no, they are standards version numbers. Once you have an ISO
standard for a programming language semantic versioning is impossible,
but the standard number is the version number.

On the other hand this is trivia and so shouldn't become a Big Issue™.

-- 
Russel.
===========================================
Dr Russel Winder      t: +44 20 7585 2200
41 Buckmaster Road    m: +44 7770 465 077
London SW11 1EN, UK   w: www.russel.org.uk
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://lists.puremagic.com/pipermail/digitalmars-d-announce/attachments/20180305/7184e63a/attachment.sig>