dmd 2.068, 2.069, 2.0xx Evil Plan going forward

[Iain Buclaw via Digitalmars-d]

On 21 July 2015 at 08:19, Martin Nowak via Digitalmars-d
<digitalmars-d at puremagic.com> wrote:
> On Tuesday, 21 July 2015 at 03:47:11 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
>>
>> 1. If you want ddmd to be compilable by both gdc and ldc then you can't
>> introduce any new features to the ddmd codebase post conversion.
>
>
> Sticking to 2.068 will help for some time but is not a long-term solution.
> Particularly when considering some of the bigger D issues left to resolve,
> we'll likely have to deal with some incompatibilities/deprecations.
> Also consider that we might use the stable phobos parts.
>
> I made a Trello card, let's discuss the details when we're actually working
> on this.
> https://trello.com/c/4NtxWDtK/30-compatibility-implications-for-self-hosting-d-compiler
>

Phobos may not be a problem depending on what ends up being decided -
there have been both arguments for and against Phobos being used in
ddmd.

I certainly don't want to have bugs get in the way, so it is in my
interest to have some sort of backport window open for 2.068 as ddmd
transforms out of it's current design.

Iain