Final by default?

[H. S. Teoh]

On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 08:01:39PM -0700, Walter Bright wrote:
> On 3/12/2014 6:30 PM, Kapps wrote:
> >I used to get frustrated when my code would randomly break every
> >compiler update (and it shows how much D has progressed that
> >regressions in my own code are now a rare occurrence), but unexpected
> >regressions such as the std.json regression are much different from
> >intended changes with plenty of time and warning that provide an
> >overall (even if slight in many cases) benefit to the end-user.
> 
> I got caught by breaking changes myself. I even approved the changes.
> But they unexpectedly broke projects of mine, and I had to go through
> updating & fixing them, supplying updates, etc.
> 
> It sux.
> 
> And it's much, much, much worse if you've got lots of legacy code
> with only a vague idea of how it works because the engineers who
> wrote it have moved on, etc.

Or you wrote that code but it has been so long ago that you don't
remember the fine details of it to be able to judge what is the correct
way to fix it. This doubly sux when the code is for a workhorse program
that you're actually *using* on a daily basis, which has been working
just fine for the last 2 years, and now it suddenly doesn't compile /
doesn't work anymore, and you need it to get something done and don't
have time to sit down and figure out why it broke (or how to fix it).


T

-- 
I am a consultant. My job is to make your job redundant. -- Mr Tom