Porting libs to 2.0 (Re: [Issue 1486] New: Can't implicitly convert char[][] to const(char)[][])

[kris]

Bill Baxter wrote:
> kris wrote:
>> Bill Baxter wrote:
>> [snip]
>>> I'd like to do more in D 2.0, but if the libraries I need aren't 
>>> ported, it's either spend a lot of time porting them myself, or stick 
>>> with D 1.  Right now D1 seems the better option.  But since D1 isn't 
>>> getting new features I suspect there will come a point when D2 gets 
>>> something so utterly cool that it's worth doing whatever it takes to 
>>> use it, including maintaining private 2.0 forks of other people's 
>>> libraries.  Of course by then they might have already ported... so I 
>>> might as well wait.
>>
>> Bill,
>>
>> If there were a clean way to alias or typedef or macro the D2 const 
>> features (within D1) then Tango and other libraries would quickly 
>> become available for D2. In other words, the const features of D2 
>> would have to be effectively ignored by the D1 compiler (through 
>> whatever means), and the use of those features in D2 would have to be 
>> 'adjustable' in a quick and easy manner (to adhere to syntactic 
>> changes). Macros might be ideal for such a notion?
> 
> Macros probably won't be a solution because D1 won't have them.

I'm (quietly) suggesting that D1 gain macro support in order to 
effectively migrate libs over to D2, stimulating adoption of D2 itself ;)