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

[Iain Buclaw via Digitalmars-d]

On 24 April 2015 at 09:22, Martin Nowak via Digitalmars-d
<digitalmars-d at puremagic.com> wrote:
> On Friday, 24 April 2015 at 02:09:06 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
>>
>> On 4/23/2015 6:26 AM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
>>>
>>> I agree it should have been done, not saying it's OK to break the process
>>> in
>>> some cases. I'm just explaining why it probably happened the way it did.
>>
>>
>> Yes, it should have been done. We screwed up.
>
>
> It's time that we agree on/document an official deprecation approach and
> rigorously enforce it, making as few exceptions as possible. As it stands
> now, everyone follows their own policy. Any volunteer to put this in a DIP?

One thing I noticed is that for many deprecations / planned
deprecations, there is no issue in bugzilla  (Override? .sort?)

I hope you don't mind me doing the honours.

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14488
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14489
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14490
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14491
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14492

Regards
Iain