Version 1.0 or Version 2.0?

Michael Kiermaier michael.kiermaier at
Fri Jul 6 01:46:34 PDT 2007

Frits van Bommel Wrote:
> > What would you recommend?
> Depends on what you want. If you want something to work without code 
> modification 1.0 would be the way to go. For cutting-edge features (see 
> below) go with 2.0, but be aware that this comes at the cost of possibly 
> breaking backwards compatibility in newer versions.

Thanks for your answer.
Of course I want both:
Cutting-edge features AND stability :)

But I understand that it is not possible at the moment.
So I think I will use 1.0 for now.

> > Some more specific questions:
> > Is there a list of the language changes from 1.0 to 2.0?
> Currently it's mostly stuff to do with final/const/invariant and the 
> fact that class invariants now need "()" to be added to avoid an 
> ambiguity caused by this.
> For a complete list (and changes in future versions, once they 
> materialize), compare the changelogs for the 2.0 and 1.0[*] branches 
> ( and 
>, respectively).
> For this purpose, you can probably ignore the "Bugs Fixed" sections and 
> focus on "New/Changed Features".
> [*]: starting at 1.017


In my opinion it would make sense to have a seperate list which documents the language changes from 1.0 to 2.0.


More information about the Digitalmars-d-learn mailing list