State of Play

[Ary Borenszweig]

Daniel Keep wrote:
> 
> ValeriM wrote:
>> Ary Borenszweig Wrote:
>>
>>> Mike James escribi�:
>>>> What is the state of play with D1.0 vs. D2.0?
>>>>
>>>> Is D1.0 a dead-end and D2.0 should be used for future projects?
>>>>
>>>> Is D2.0 stable enough for use at the present?
>>>>
>>>> Is Tango for D2.0 at a level of D1.0 and can be used now?
>>>>
>>>> Is DWT ready for D2.0 now?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Regards, mike.
>>> I don't know why a lot of people see D1.0 as a dead-end. It's a stable 
>>> language. It won't get new features. It won't change. It'll probably 
>>> receive bug fixes. It works. It gets the job done. You can use it and be 
>>> sure than in a time all of what you did will still be compatible with 
>>> "newer" versions of D1.
>> No. It's not stable.
>> Try to build last Tango and DWT releases with D1.041 and you will get the problems.
> 
> "It's a stable language."
> 
> Note the use of the word "language."
> 
> What you're referring to are bugs in the compiler.  It happens.
> 
>   -- Daniel

But ValieriM has a point. If I code, say, a library in D 1.041 only to 
find out that in a couple of months it won't compile anymore in D 1.045, 
that's not good at all. That's when someone sends a message to the 
newsgroups saying "I just downloaded library Foo, but it won't compile 
with D 1.045... is it abandoned? Why isn't it maintained? D1 is broken". 
The point is, you shouldn't need to maintain libraries for D1 anymore. 
Maybe the test suite for D1 should be bigger to cover more cases...