Who favors the current D1 situation?

[Steven Schveighoffer]

"Walter Bright" wrote
> Sean Kelly wrote:
>> but at the moment I'm
>> barred from D2 by the const features,
>
> What exactly is barring you?

I helped to do an exploratory 'port' of Tango to D2 (version 2.007 I 
believe).  The rationale is, D2 is getting all these new features, but 
everyone who uses Tango is not testing them.  I don't know the statistics, 
but I would assume that a fair number of people who have good skills that 
would be useful to help QA D2 are using Tango (including myself), and 
therefore not using D2.  My fear was that D2 would be blessed, and when the 
Tango developers went to port it, would find that some design decision made 
it impossible to do something.

So during the port, I found several critical issues that made it difficult 
to port.  I worked around some of them, and some have been fixed, but here 
are the outstanding issues that prevented a true finished port:

http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=1644
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=1645
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=1680
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=1654

The last is really one of these 'design' issues that prevents a true port. 
Although Tango could be redesigned to fit within the const design of D2, I'd 
rather have D2 be modified to allow the design of Tango (and phobos) to 
work.

Oh, and as always, it would be nice if tail-const class references were 
possible :)  Not sure if you're working on that or not.  But that's really 
not a blocker for porting Tango.

-Steve