We are forking D

[Lance Bachmeier]

On Sunday, 7 January 2024 at 21:16:46 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 07, 2024 at 04:43:17PM +0000, Lance Bachmeier via 
> Digitalmars-d wrote: [...]
>> I'd much rather Adam put his time into a fork, rather than the 
>> more common approach where he'd post here under various names, 
>> make ridiculous claims, and vandalize the discussions. If 
>> you're new, you may not have seen the many posts from someone 
>> that doesn't like private at the module level.
>
> Are you sure you have your facts straight? AFAIK the 
> pseudonymous trolls who posted about private or this or that 
> complaint were not Adam, they were some other disgruntled 
> former D user who has since left.  AFAIK Adam has never engaged 
> in such tactics and was in close contact with the core D team 
> until the recent spat (which is the culmination of ongoing 
> disagreements on governance that started more recently).

I'm saying it's good Adam isn't doing that, not that he is.

>> Whether there are useful insights from this or any other fork 
>> will depend on what they do with it. If there's too much 
>> incompatibility of code, due to breaking changes, it won't 
>> have much effect. There's already Nim, Rust, Go, Zig, etc., to 
>> compare with and the forks will in each case be just another 
>> language.
>
> Adam has stated (publicly, in the opendlang github discussions) 
> that he does not plan to make major changes to the language 
> that would massively break compatibility.  But of course, if 
> this fork continues independently then over time things will 
> diverge sooner or later.

I'm not sure what he has planned. I was just making a statement 
about forks in general - the more incompatibilities of a fork 
from the original, the less effect it has upstream. I think it's 
too early to speculate what will come of Adam's fork.