Breaking backwards compatiblity

Timon Gehr timon.gehr at gmx.ch
Fri Mar 9 15:19:30 PST 2012


On 03/10/2012 12:09 AM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
> "Nick Sabalausky"<a at a.a>  wrote in message
> news:jje2cg$27tg$1 at digitalmars.com...
>> "Walter Bright"<newshound2 at digitalmars.com>  wrote in message
>> news:jje0er$24mb$1 at digitalmars.com...
>>> This statement is from Linus Torvalds about breaking binary
>>> compatibility:
>>>
>>> https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/3/8/495
>>>
>>> While I don't think we need to worry so much at the moment about breaking
>>> binary compatibility with new D releases, we do have a big problem with
>>> breaking source code compatibility.
>>>
>>> This is why we need to have a VERY high bar for breaking changes.
>>
>> Freezing things against breaking changes is all fine and good, but NOT
>> before they're reached a point where they're good enough to be frozen.
>> Premature freezing is how you create cruft and other such shit. Let's not
>> go jumping any guns here.
>>

+1.

>
> Keep in mind, too, that Linux has decades of legacy and millions of users.
> That's a *very* different situation from Phobos. Apples and oranges.
>
>

+1.


More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list