DMD needs branches

[Brad Roberts]

On Fri, 13 Apr 2007, Walter Bright wrote:

> Russell Lewis wrote:
> > But that is not necessary the fault of the library code themselves. Perhaps
> > one of them can't use an old compiler because there is a compiler crash, and
> > one can't use a new compiler because it uses a syntax (or keyword) that used
> > to be valid but is now not allowed.  If there was "stable" branch of the
> > older compiler, that included the bugfix but not the language change, then
> > both libraries would work together just fine.
> 
> But bugfixes themselves can cause such problems.

Sure, they can.  That's not the issue.  The issue is that a bug fix is 
considerably less likely to introduce regressions than new features are.  
By separating where new features are emerging, you've got a much higher 
chance of keeping a monotomically increasing in stability release version.

If you stick with absolutes can or can't, the debate just can't go 
anywhere.  Nothing is that black or white, it's all about the shades of 
grey.

Later,
Brad