Moving towards D2 2.061 (and D1 1.076)

[Walter Bright]

On 12/13/2012 4:17 PM, David Nadlinger wrote:
> 1. How much work would it be for the guys at Remedy Games to convert their
> codebase from [] to @()?

I don't know. All I know is it's a lot of code.


> 2. What is your plan moving forward, i.e. how to you intend to handle
> deprecation/removal of the feature?

Warning, then deprecation, then removal. The usual.


> 3. Why is the message you introduced a warning instead of a normal deprecation
> error?

Because skipping the warning phase has historically been too abrupt for people.


> For 1., I would guess at most something like half an hour for a large codebase
> where the feature is used pervasively (you just keep editing/compiling until
> there are no more syntax errors), which is why I can't quite understand the fuzz
> you are making about keeping the feature. And even if they cannot switch right
> now, as the Remedy guys are obviously willing to use experimental compiler
> versions, can't they just use a patched version until they have made the switch?

Like any major user of a language, they want confidence in our full support of 
them. Asking them to use a patched or branch version of the compiler does not 
inspire confidence.


> Let me also repeat the most important point: If we release 2.061 like this, DMD
> will silently accept the old syntax, so your decision will actually lead to
> *more* breakage when the feature is removed in the future.

The [ ] syntax was never documented and won't be, so I doubt there'll be any new 
use of it, nor does it interfere with anything else.


What I'm doing is hardly unique in business history. When Boeing designed the 
707, they showed the prototype to Pan Am, their biggest potential customer. Pan 
Am wanted a slightly wider fuselage. At enormous expense, Boeing threw out their 
tooling and built all new tooling and a new design, all just to make the sale to 
Pan Am. It paid off enormously for Boeing, because with Pan Am buying 707s, the 
other airlines all couldn't wait to buy them, too.

When Westinghouse had AC and Edison had DC, they competed for the Niagra power 
project. Both knew that would be the lynchpin of their industry, and both did 
whatever it took to get that design win. Westinghouse got the contract, and 
that's why our electrical grid is 60 Hz AC.

Ok, we're not Boeing or Westinghouse. But we have an opportunity to go big time, 
and I'm not going to let that get away from us.