TLBB: The Last Big Breakage

[Jesse Phillips]

On Monday, 17 March 2014 at 05:14:40 UTC, Marco Leise wrote:
>> Deprecation is breaking code, it's a good way to to do it, but 
>> you shouldn't kid yourself that it isn't a breaking change.
>
> It certainly is a subjective matter.

I don't see how it is. How do you define a change which has 
broken code.

> I just try to
> fix these locations immediately instead of changing the build
> options to include -d.

You're code no longer compiles due to a compiler change, that is 
what I consider a breaking change.

> Silent breaking changes are a totally different beast.

Agreed.

> At the end of the day I see no way for D to evolve "correctly"
> with the man power it has and the demands for both a stable
> target and improvements to so many things from
> final-by-default over "scope" to "shared".
> If we collected all these bits in a list we would see that
> they can't all be fixed in one release and things are still
> going to break quite a few times in the future. TLBB? Not
> quite there yet! ;-)

Agreed. Just because we feel that D still needs breaking changes, 
doesn't mean we should change the definition so that we can tell 
the world we don't break code every release. "No civilian 
casualties! We just found it easier to declare all humans as 
combatants."