dmd 2.029 release

[Russell Lewis]

Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> bearophile wrote:
>> Andrei Alexandrescu:
>>> If it were an error, I wouldn't let it go.
>>
>> It's an error. It will lead to troubles.
> 
> Well at most you could say it's error-prone, something that is easier to 
> argue. The problem is that forcing it into an error makes quite a number 
> of valid uses impossible. An example is a logging application that 
> provides you a number of pieces of information (date, time, message, 
> etc.) and you get to specify how they should be formatted. Oftentimes 
> you'd choose to ignore some data.
> 
> Andrei

Fair enough.  But then let's split off a version of the function which 
allows unused arguments.  For most users, in most cases, unused 
arguments are indicative of an error.

Case in point: I have been bitten by this perhaps half a dozen times 
*already* porting older code.  This code used to work fine:

	writefln("The value is: %d", myVar, ".  Do something!");

Now, it interprets the trailing string as an unused argument, and 
ignores it (silently).  Ugh.

Ofc, looking back, I don't like that old coding style...I'm migrating 
back more to C-style (give the whole format string first).  But the fact 
that I had a *silent* error was frustrating.

Russ