DMD 1.022 and 2.005 releases

[Brad Roberts]

Bill Baxter wrote:
> Brad Roberts wrote:
>> Lutger wrote:
>>> Brad Roberts wrote:
>>>> (moved from digitalmars.D.announce since I'm gonna guess that this 
>>>> will spawn a rather large thread)
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, 5 Oct 2007, Walter Bright wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Bug fixes. New (and very modest) C++ interface. Library module 
>>>>> overhauls by
>>>>> Andrei Alexandrescu. Brad Roberts is working behind the curtain to 
>>>>> get phobos
>>>>> development much better organized.
>>>>
>>>> In addition to better organized, over the next several releases of 
>>>> the 2.x compiler and it's associated runtime and phobos libraries, 
>>>> you can expect to see incremental work towards rationalizing a 
>>>> number of the differences between dmd's phobos, gdc's phobos, and 
>>>> tango's compiler runtime layers for dmd and gdc.
>>>>
>>>> I'm not committing to a specific order or timeline at this point, 
>>>> just that the work has started.  The unittest fixes in this release 
>>>> were a direct result of me getting my hands dirty.
>>>>
>>>> More soon,
>>>> Brad
>>>>
>>>
>>> Great, thank you for your work. I have one question: can you comment 
>>> on what will / might happen to the 1.x branch? Is there an intent to 
>>> make it compatible with Tango eventually, or is that a 2.x only thing?
>>
>> The 1.x branch is for bug fixes.  Where there's changes in Tango that 
>> are specifically fixing bugs in the runtime, those will likely go into 
>> 1.x and 2.x.  However, most of the changes are restructurings, and 
>> those will be 2.x only.
> 
> You meant changes in Phobos, right?
> 
> --bb

No, I meant Tango, or at least the runtime layer of it.  It contains 
changes that are bug fixes and changes that are re-structurings or just 
brand new code.

As the changes from Tango are merged into Phobos, those that are 
strictly bug fixes, they will apply to both 1.x and 2.x.  The changes 
that are not just bug fixes will not go into 1.x but will be 
incorporated into just 2.x.

Make sense?

There's a natural consequence of this.  For DMD 1.x (and it's Phobos 
1.x), the Phobos vs Tango split is permanent, essentially, unless Tango 
is changed to sit on top of the Phobos supplied runtime.  I don't think 
that's likely and from my point of view, that's ok.  As D 2.x (and it's 
implementation in DMD 2.x) matures and the runtimes converge, Tango can 
choose to support 2.x and not need to replace the runtime but can 
instead be a darned useful add-on library.

Later,
Brad