State of Play

[Clay Smith]

Ary Borenszweig wrote:
> 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...

You should be using the compiler that comes bundled with Tango, perhaps.