D as first class language in the gcc milestones ?

[Ledd via D.gnu]

On Sunday, 28 September 2014 at 11:19:21 UTC, ketmar via D.gnu 
wrote:
> On Sun, 28 Sep 2014 08:44:20 +0000
> "Ledd via D.gnu" <d.gnu at puremagic.com> wrote:
>
>> My point being that for the majority of people, the ones that
>> work on open source projects, large projects, productions for 
>> the
>> masses, a stable language and a predictable release cycle, is
>> more valuable then a cutting-edge feature-reach language .
> so they can take a stable language with predictable release 
> cycle and
> so on. C, for example. D must change faster, not slower. i 
> can't see
> why i should lose features which makes D valuable for me to 
> please
> imaginary future adopters.

That's because you are not thinking about the "shipping date" as 
a feature, you are not even considering it as an option.

You will never get 1 single customer if you say "I can do X for 
you but I can't determine when I'll ship that" . And any 
developer interested in D is a customer of yours .

A predictable release cycle it's absolutely not about "losing 
features" C and C++ in the gcc compiler have all the bells and 
whistles, they even have the compiler support for technologies 
way beyond the ISO C or C++ standards .

Also, on average, you get a new release of gcc every 2-3 months, 
with a new milestone being published in about 11-12 months . I 
can't think about this as a problem, there are commercial C/C++ 
compilers that don't have half of the same features that gcc 
offers .

the first release of D1 is about 13 years old, D2 is about 7 
years old, it's probably time to decide whether it will be a 
rolling-release language as long as it will live or to 
stabilize/standardize it . I don't think that keeping things as 
they are will do any good to D .