State of Play

Ary Borenszweig ary at esperanto.org.ar
Thu Mar 26 07:05:41 PDT 2009


dsimcha wrote:
> == Quote from Ary Borenszweig (ary at esperanto.org.ar)'s article
>> 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...
> 
> Yes, but there's a difference between being broken in some trivial way that
> requires a few greps and a recompile and being broken in a way that requires
> people to actually review and possibly redesign parts of the code to fix it.  I
> really don't see how the former is a big deal.

When I download a library for Java, Python or C#, I download it, 
reference it and it works. If I had to fix something for it to work, I 
woudldn't use it. Mainly because to fix it I'd had to understand the 
code, and I just want to understand the interface.

If you have to modify a library when you download it just to make it 
work (not to tweak it), that's a huge problem for me.



More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list