WTF: dmd 2.066 vs. dmd 2.067 really dangerous code breakage

[Daniel Kozak via Digitalmars-d]

On Wednesday, 22 April 2015 at 11:36:35 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
> On Wednesday, 22 April 2015 at 11:28:44 UTC, Daniel Kozak wrote:
>> This code compile fine under both versions:
>>
>> dmd (2.066, -debug -d):
>
> -d is your enemy, If you remove that, there will be a clear 
> warning "Deprecation: variable XXX.S.FLAG_ON immutable field 
> with initializer should be static, __gshared, or an enum". You 
> decided to ignore and hide it, why the surprise about the 
> breakage?

I decided to ignore deprication messages, but I never expect it 
could lead to change semantics. I would expect compile breakage 
on 2.067 and after some releases maybe change of semantics. Btw. 
on 2.067 its compile even without -d parameter