Dicebot on leaving D: It is anarchy driven development in all its glory.

[aliak]

On Sunday, 26 August 2018 at 09:59:37 UTC, Peter Alexander wrote:
> On Sunday, 26 August 2018 at 08:40:32 UTC, Andre Pany wrote:
>> In the whole discussion I miss 2 really important things.
>>
>> If your product compiles fine with a dmd version, no one 
>> forces you to update to the next dmd version. In the company I 
>> work for, we set for each project the DMD version in the build 
>> settings. The speed of DMD releases or breaking changes 
>> doesn't affect us at all.
>
> If your product is a library then your customers dictate which 
> dmd version you build with.

Why is this a problem? I have the exact same thought. This is not 
an unsolvable problem.

Package managers have solved this ages ago with a min-version 
flag.

The compiler can do the same if D is against just embracing the 
package manager as the way to do things.

If D has an LTS version and cutting edge then I don't see the 
problem:

a) You broke me lib! => Set a min-compilation version flag, or 
use LTS (you have both options)

- Qt does this.
- Node does this.
- iOS Foundation even gets rid of crap, and their user base is 
HUGE.
- Safari is completely revamping how cookies and storage APIs 
work. That's *universal*. Programmers are dealing with it.

Yes their user base is much bigger - so they can survive - is 
probably one subjective argument. But then if you have an LTS 
then what's the argument?

b) Why you no update D?! => use cutting edge.

The only problem I see is manpower.

Cheers,
- Ali