dmd 2.063 beta 5

[Andrei Alexandrescu]

On 5/23/13 8:56 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
> On 5/23/2013 5:35 PM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
>> What about making it an error UNLESS you pass a compiler flag. The
>> user will be
>> informed, and the new behavior (which I find useful) is possible.
>
> While that idea has significant merit, I oppose it on the following
> grounds:
>
> 1. It forces a very abrupt change. We've followed a policy of gradual
> change, giving people plenty of time to adapt their codebase. This does
> not.

I don't understand this. It's change under 100% user control.

> 2. Having optional errors like that leads to unfortunate problems inside
> generic code that tests whether some constructs compile or not.

The warning has the same problem.

I'm not seeing a comparison between the warning and the opt-in, but 
instead weak arguments against the opt-in and no comparison with the 
warning.


Andrei