Warning, ABI breakage from 2.074 to 2.075

[evilrat via Digitalmars-d]

On Thursday, 25 May 2017 at 17:10:01 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:
> On Thursday, 25 May 2017 at 17:04:10 UTC, Jason King wrote:
>> And how many of those are claiming to be a systems programming 
>> language?
>>
>> I have no problems with an unstable ABI, what I have a problem 
>> is with
>> claiming to be a systems programming language AND not having a 
>> stable ABI.
>> You realistically cannot have both — it seems like D is trying 
>> to have it’s
>> cake and eat it too and I’m just pointing out that it’s going 
>> to lead to
>> sadness.  If there are no plans to ever have a stable ABI, 
>> that’s fine (may
>> even be good for the long term usage of the language), just 
>> drop the whole
>> systems programming language bit and focus more on application 
>> level, but
>> I’ve not really seen any recognition of that.
>>
>
> From that point of view, C++ and Ada aren't system programming 
> languages.

Exactly. Maybe I have holes in my memory, but I can't remember 
anything on "final C++ ABI standard". In fact I can even recall 
something like this - "by not doing so(ABI freeze, I mean) we are 
able to stay in touch with newer hardware"