DMD 0.148 release

[Tom]

In article <du19j7$15r9$2 at digitaldaemon.com>, Walter Bright says...
>
>
>"Tom" <Tom_member at pathlink.com> wrote in message 
>news:du049t$2uv2$1 at digitaldaemon.com...
>> Yes, PLEASE, WHY?? Just ONE argument against pure bools, only one and I 
>> shut my
>> mouth forever!
>
>One should be very careful about stepping away from C's implicit promotion 
>rules for a language that aims to be a successor to C. C absolutely *buried* 
>Pascal.

So it's because you think that leaving C bools has more "marketing" and would
achieve more "popularity" among future D coders (and most of all, C coders)?
Or is it because you don't want C users to feel uncomfortable with D? 
Just to be a succesor doesn't mean that you can't change the rules, in fact you
changed a lot of them so that D compiler isn't a C compiler. 
OTOH I'm a C coder as well as coder of another languages, and I would asure you
that pure boolean consequences wouldn't bother me at all.

>Pascal didn't have implicit type conversions. That meant that typical Pascal 
>code was littered with casts. It was ugly, and I'd argue that casting 
>reduces type safety, rather than enhancing it.

Ok, so pure booleans would end in this kind of cast invasion? If this was the
case (which I can't see right now), then I would totally understand you leave
bool as it is. But if I can recall someone said in another post, languages as C#
has pure booleans implemented: I don't see people crying about C# because of it.
It's becomming tremendously popular in fact!

>Pascal played catchup ever since, adopting features of C. Then Pascal++ 
>(i.e. Modula 2) came out, which was promptly buried by C++. 

I agree that Pascal is dead but don't see D as a future Pascal at all, no matter
if it has pure booleans or not. :)

As a final thought I realize that this bool fight has more taste-related
arguments to defend each position than pragmatic ones. So we WON'T convince
Walter 'cos it would be a matter of trying to change people tastes. We know that
this is IMPOSSIBLE ;)

Thanks for the answers,

Tom;