Give me a break

[Nick Sabalausky]

"Steve Teale" <steve.teale at britseyeview.com> wrote in message 
news:h2asuv$cm4$1 at digitalmars.com...
> dsimcha Wrote:
>
>> I feel that miscellaneous toolchain issues (other than implementing 
>> changes to the
>> spec and fixing bugs that severely affect the usability of language 
>> features) are
>> an order of magnitude less important because this stuff can always be 
>> done after
>> the fact without breaking code.  In other words, once the spec is 
>> finalized and a
>> decent reference implementation is out the door, people can confidently 
>> use D2
>> knowing that the situation will only get better.  Until then, it's two 
>> steps
>> forward, one step back when code breaks in non-trivial ways due to a spec 
>> change
>> or a compiler bug makes a seemingly useful feature that you planned on 
>> using
>> absolutely useless.
>
> Dsimcha,
>
> Everything can be done later. The concern is 'will it'. If D dies on the 
> way because people come to look __again__ and see same-old, same-old, then 
> this is a real risk.
>

Sorry about my bad mood and echoing of the "elbow grease" stance, but "it 
will" if people work on these things (as they are doing) instead of 
complaining about the sky falling.