Windows experience is atrocious

[harakim]

On Tuesday, 25 July 2023 at 09:55:31 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
> But a project that used to compile should continue to do so no 
> matter what.
I agree with this, and I guess technically if you had every 
version of dmd lying around it could do it today. You wouldn't be 
able to necessarily do it with one version of the compiler... you 
would have to look at each library separately. That's where your 
version comes in or using binaries.

> Essentially, what I'm proposing is in effect the equivalent of 
> having a virtual dub package whose versions reflect the 
> language version, and different modules will depend on 
> different versions. If there's a way to resolve the 
> dependencies, then the code should compile. If not, it won't 
> compile, and wouldn't have compiled in the first place, so 
> users should have already noticed this and did something about 
> it.

I have had similar thoughts about versioning but I think it could 
be difficult and also it could make the compiler extremely 
complex. That's why I was thinking about the one time upgrade 
tool. However, if you had multiple versions of the compiler 
installed and the latest version would just defer to an older 
version, if available, then this would actually be a simpler 
solution and require very little re-work.