Is D 0.163 D 1.0?

[Reiner Pope]

Peter C. Chapin wrote:
> Reiner Pope wrote:
> 
>> 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."
> 
> I guess it depends on how one looks at these things.
> 
> Designing a library that works well takes time and, ideally, lots of 
> real world experience with prototypes. It's hard to accumulate that 
> experience, it seems to me, before the language has stablized. Requiring 
> D v1.0 to be a stable language *and* to have an extensive library might 
> take more time than would be good (although, honestly, I'm not that 
> familiar with the extent of what's available right now in the way of D 
> libraries). Long delays before a 1.0 release might turn some people off 
> as well.
> 
> Peter
OK, you and Dave have convinced me.