Why no stable LTS releases?

[Ola Fosheim Grøstad]

On Monday, 14 June 2021 at 14:48:43 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
> The darwin port maintainer and I have been testing various OS X 
> versions and hardware combinations.

Good to know, thanks!

> I think people would prefer to have the latest over 
> regression-free.  Having a release branch open for 3 years 
> should allow plenty of time for all regressions to be plugged 
> long after DMD has moved on to the next major release.

Maybe. I strongly prefer regression free (applies to all 
languages, not only D), maybe others have different priorities.

When you say you have a release branch open for 3 years, how many 
branches do that imply?

> 3. ldc.attributes vs. gcc.attributes.  I've kept it in sync 
> with LDC, but GDC has a few more attributes available - mostly 
> alternative names though to match GCC equivalents.
>
>> Are there differences between GDC and LDC inline assembly?
>>
>
> Yes, there are.  Though LDC does support GDC-style asm nowadays.

Ok, so it should be possible then to add a linting-pass to GDC 
that warns against LDC-incompatible features? Thus making GDC the 
preferred compiler for library authors that does not want to 
litter they code with conditional compilation statements?

Anyway, making it possible to write tutorials/libraries that 
remain valid over time and that works equally well for both 
production compilers would greatly improve the eco system.

There is a lot of old D code on github, sadly it can no longer be 
viewed as relevant to the eco system...

Something worth thinking about, in my view.