@property - take it behind the woodshed and shoot it?
SeeWebsiteForEmail at erdani.org
Thu Jan 24 13:23:53 PST 2013
On 1/24/13 4:06 PM, mist wrote:
> On Thursday, 24 January 2013 at 21:00:32 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>> On 1/24/13 3:58 PM, mist wrote:
>>> Really, all this backwards-compatibility talk is a crap.
>> There's just a lot of evidence that suggests the contrary. Clearly we
>> don't want or like to be conservative, but apparently we need to.
> Do you read and answer only to the first sentence?
It was your second paragraph I quoted.
> Can you honestly say
> "D design is rock solid and correct, we will never be required to make
> any backwards-incompatible change"?
Clearly the design is imperfect.
> If you check those evidences, it was never breaking code alone. It was
> breaking code AND lack of any sane process that allows to stick with
> acceptable release version for longer time. And I suggest to fix the
> right thing, not freeze specs and hope all problems will fade themselves.
My understanding is that we're working on such.
More information about the Digitalmars-d