Do we need a time-out in D evolution?

[Carlos Santander]

eao197 escribió:
> 
> But for me it looks like: it is better to wait the next version of D 
> language than writing something in D1.0 and rewritting it later.
> 

But it wouldn't be rewriting because the bulk of everything would be there. See 
below.

> I think a part of the problem is that there are many technologists and 
> early adopters in D community. They all with you have made great and 
> incredible work for D -- thank you for that! But it is time now when 
> more and more pragmatics looks to D as a serious alternative to C++ 
> (Java, C#, you name it). And pragmatics have different view and 
> different demands for the language stability and the language evolution. 
> So please listen our wishes too.
> 
> As a pragmatic (I hope) I think it is a very sad when a language gets 
> incompatible changes. I didn't need to rewrite my C++ code when switched 
> from one C++ version to another, the same for Java, the same for Ruby. 
> C# is a good example too. So I ask you: don't make D3.0 (and even D4.0) 
> incompatible with D2.0 please.
> 

I might be wrong, but I don't think Dv2 will be incompatible with Dv1 in a major 
way. If you start coding now, perhaps you'll have to branch your code to make 
use of the shiny new features of Dv2, but I don't foresee many changes. Of 
course, I guess that depends on your actual code and the features you want to 
use, but I still wouldn't be so worried.

-- 
Carlos Santander Bernal