1.0 ??
Charlie
charlies at nowhere.com
Sun Nov 5 09:48:19 PST 2006
I'd love to see this happen, both the separation of DMD and D and a 1.0.
I also think the sooner than better, as these things usually take longer
than expected.
Georg Wrede wrote:
> 1.0?
>
> Does that imply a simultaneous 1.0 for D and DMD??
>
> Suppose they were decoupled. Then we might decide on D 1.0 (say in
> December) and from there go on with fixing library issues, *installing*
> issues (especially on Linux), and even try to create a package that
> strives to be as good as Shrink-Wrap, i.e. simply work out of the box,
> and be somewhat usable regarding GUI development. Say, in March.
>
> In the meantime we could polish DMD, interact with the GDC guys to get
> the two exactly alike, and then maybe even write some example code with
> more user value than the current printf-Hello-World style examples.
>
> ---
>
> I recently talked with a CIO (who was somewhat familiar with D), who
> said that "short of taking a snapshot of D and sticking with it, there's
> no way we're gonna start using a moving target as our base, no matter if
> it's ten times as good as the next language." And he didn't seem likely
> to go the snapshot way.
>
> The implication being that 1.0 or not, what a company needs is
> stability. Stability in code, tools, programmer knowledge (as in hiring
> and firing folks), a developer community specifically knowledgeable with
> the problems of the _current_ version, a community developing and
> maintaining up to date libraries targeted _precisely_ at the current
> release, and of course a conviction that the current state of affairs
> will continue for a reasonable amount of time (i.e. a belief in
> everything not becoming obsolete in three months, be it due to a super
> cool new version or simply code-breaking upgrades).
>
> So,,, we need to create an _illusion_ of stability. This might be by
> publishing 1.0, and at the same time separating the newsgroups into two
> distinct areas:
>
> - faq
> - learn
> - issues
> - general
> - howto
>
> and otoh:
>
> - future.general
> - future.issues
> - future.brainstorm
> - future.roadmap
> - future.implementation ( = down-to-earth view on new things)
>
> Or some such, anyway.
>
> We might also promise to not publish a new (stable) version within 12
> months of 1.0. (This may really be a more important promise for the
> customers and prospective developers and consultants than we here
> realize just off-hand.)
More information about the Digitalmars-d
mailing list