Why is 2.0 in the works already?

[Jascha Wetzel]

it's as important to improve the language as to improve it's major 
implementation. they're two different things, though, and shouldn't 
mutually block each other's progress.

i was starting out writing the paragraph below, but then it boiled down 
to the 2 sentences above ;)

dividing development into creation and maintenance, i think tasks from 
these two categories can and should be interleaved or parallel. that is 
mainly because the kind of work they require is very different and 
restricting oneself to one category is restricting the overall 
efficiency of the development process.
there are exceptions to this where, by creating new things before fixing 
others, you raise problems to the power of what they would be if they're 
fixed first, but in many cases the problem sets are completely or 
largely disjoint. this, to my understanding, is the case in the changes 
we've seen in D 2.0.
it is the overall feature-set * stability factor that makes the project 
valuable. you can improve on both sides to improve the project.
particularly the const-complex is a feature that, imho, put D in a 
not-yet-grown-up state if compared to C++.

Stewart Gordon wrote:
> After a few years of work, it was only the beginning of this year that 
> we reached 1.0.
> 
> Yet there's already been quite a bit of talk about 2.0, and now even an 
> alpha release.
> 
> What's going on here?  There's still the majority of d1.0blocker 
> nominees, including such quite serious ones as 302 and 677.  Shouldn't 
> we work towards getting 1.0 finished first?
> 
> Stewart.