Is D 0.163 D 1.0?

[Reiner Pope]

Peter C. Chapin wrote:

> It seems to me that an official 1.0 release will encourage library 
> writers who might be waiting for D to stablize before investing too much 
> time creating libraries for it. Everyone knows that "1.0" means "first 
> cut." I don't think extensive libraries are necessary at this point. 
> Relative stability of language features, however, would be desirable so 
> that extensive libraries could be created without too much reworking 
> later on.
> 
> Peter

Not trying to be too argumentative here, but I obviously disagree with 
what you said, otherwise I wouldn't have said it in the first place. The 
problem is that the more *big* releases you make, the less interest 
people take in the language, so it's a good idea too catch their 
interest from the start. I disagree that "1.0" means first cut, because 
in many OSS projects (which D effectively is), version numbers don't get 
to 2.0 or beyond. IMHO it really means, "we've got a complete product 
now, you should have no problems with it." So if someone believes this 
and then finds that it doesn't come with the built-in libraries they 
wanted, all of a sudden D is going to use a potential user, because 
they're not likely to come back and try again later unless they were 
_extremely_ dedicated.

Cheers,

Reiner