Prime time???

[Charlie]

The other languages just move much slower ;).

Its not that new releases break old code ( though it sometimes does ) , 
its that when new features are added - the old code needs to be 
refactored to take advantage of the new features.

I like that D is cutting edge and trying things that haven't been done 
before, but to develop any lasting code developers need some sort of 
agreed upon language feature set , so it doesn't feel like we're in a 
never ending refactoring circle ( this is especially true of library 
builders I would think ).

Why not devote a few releases to getting a 1.0 , and continue with a 
developmental branch , working its way to 2.0, best of both worlds.  I 
don't want to hinder D  development, and if it takes another few years 
to get a 1.0 so be it, but I think building up a solid base of existing 
code is going to be important to getting D into the mainstream.

Charlie

Walter Bright wrote:
> Charlie wrote:
>> I've been fretting over the same thing, and a 'moving target' 
>> describes it well.
>>
>> With all the new additions recently I stopped holding my breath, I 
>> figure at this rate it'll be another 3 years for a 1.0.
> 
> But isn't every language a moving target? Doesn't it make sense to just 
> start using it?