<html><head></head><body><div style="font-family: Verdana;font-size: 12.0px;"><div>On Wed, 28 May 2014 08:41:43 +0000<br/>
Don via Digitalmars-d <digitalmars-d@puremagic.com> wrote:<br/>
<br/>
> On Wednesday, 28 May 2014 at 03:25:28 UTC, Suminda Dharmasena<br/>
> wrote:<br/>
> > Hi,<br/>
> ><br/>
> > D2 has been out for a while. Looking to see what the roadmap is<br/>
> > like towards D3?<br/>
> ><br/>
> > Suminda<br/>
><br/>
> No, it has not been out for a while. I would even say that it's<br/>
> not out yet!<br/>
> It still doesn't exist yet in the same way as D1.<br/>
><br/>
> D1 was a clearly defined snapshot of the language at a particular<br/>
> moment in time.<br/>
> The feature list is unchanged since D1.014, except for array<br/>
> operations which were finally implemented in D1.034. It reached<br/>
> release 1.076 just with bugfixes, ie there were 61 bugfix<br/>
> releases.<br/>
><br/>
> D2 is the ongoing language development, and we still don't have a<br/>
> stability branch more recent than the D1 branch. Almost every<br/>
> release has contained a new feature, and I can't see that<br/>
> stopping anytime soon.<br/>
<br/>
Not to mention, there probably aren't even all that many places that we'd<br/>
change the language in a non-backwards compatible way even if we could start<br/>
from scratch (and even in those places, we might not change them in D3,<br/>
because it would make porting from D2 to D3 much riskier). By no means is D2<br/>
perfect, but for the most part, I think that we can either fix the problems<br/>
with it without resorting to D3, or we'd end up having similar problems in D3<br/>
anyway.<br/>
<br/>
Regardless, we need to make D2 a success before we even consider considering<br/>
creating something like D3. And there may never be a D3. That's a question that</div>
<div>really shouldn't be up for discussion for years yet.</div>
<div><br/>
- Jonathan M Davis</div></div></body></html>