D3 is potentially damaging

Alex Rønne Petersen xtzgzorex at gmail.com
Tue May 1 21:31:33 PDT 2012


On 02-05-2012 06:22, H. S. Teoh wrote:
> On Wed, May 02, 2012 at 03:31:34AM +0200, Era Scarecrow wrote:
> [...]
>> But IF there is a D3 coming then it would be absolutely necessary
>> that the D2 and D3 code could call each other seamlessly. D3 if/when
>> it comes hopefully would be seen as the next step towards the ideal
>> language which we would want and go to: This includes style,
>> standard library, functionality, syntax, and perhaps collective
>> experience of dozens or hundreds or programmers.
>
> Hey, actually, that's an excellent idea. If there is ever a D3, it
> should be binary-compatible with D2 code. At the very least, they should
> be able to call each other seamlessly. In fact, dmd v3 should have a
> compatibility option that supports compiling D2 code. This will ease the
> D2->D3 transition a lot, and not alienate existing users (they can
> continue using D2 for existing projects, and start new projects /
> components with D3).

Or just, you know, call it dmd3 like DMD for D2 should have been called 
dmd2.

>
>
> [...]
>>   We will have to watch and wait to see what happens. In the
>> meantime, I don't want to ever do any real C++ if I can help it...
>
> Same here. For all its current warts, D is still superior to C++, and by
> a long shot.  I just can't bear the thought of writing any more C++
> code, especially for my own projects.
>
>
> T
>


-- 
- Alex


More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list