DMD needs branches

torhu fake at address.dude
Fri Apr 13 02:23:45 PDT 2007


Walter Bright wrote:
> torhu wrote:
>> This is pasted from the readme.txt for my DWT app:
>> 
>> ---
>> Versions 0.174 to 1.0 should work.
>> Versions 1.001 to 1.006 do not work properly with DWT apps.
>> Version 1.007 through 1.010 works.
>> Versions 1.011 and 1.012 do not work.
>> ---
>> 
>> Maybe I'm taking the wrong approach to this.  But I don't know how I 
>> could realistically avoid it.
> 
> I don't see any way you can avoid it, regardless of what I do. You 
> should list the compiler versions that the library is guaranteed to work 
> with (and perhaps have a download link for them). That's one reason why 
> all the versions are available for download.

The problem wouldn't go away, but it would be greatly reduced.  The 
serious new bugs in 1.011 were discovered almost immediately after the 
release.  Wouldn't it be better if 1.011 was marked as a beta, and not 
unleashed on the general public until the core D user community had at 
least verified that their apps and libs build with it?

Then you wouldn't need to rush out emergency fixes, like 1.002 through 
1.004. You could wait until the dust settles, and maybe get all new bugs 
fixed in just a single second beta release.  1.012 might also have been 
a bit premature.  I just didn't have time to look into and create a test 
case and bug report for the invariant parsing issue (bugzilla 1135) 
until yesterday.  That issue seems pretty serious to me, and my app 
won't build until it's fixed.

Not have some kind of separation between bleeding edge and proven stable 
compiler versions creates a lot of confusion and headaches for everyone.


PS. I don't mean to sound like I'm not grateful for what you do, I still 
love working with D. Just trying to give constructive feedback. ;)



More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list