D 1.x and 2.x where x != 0 - will there be such a thing?

[Anders F Björklund]

Stewart Gordon wrote:

> There have been many changes to the language spec over time.  
> Nonetheless, UIMS, none of them incremented the version number of the 
> language, except for the change from having no version number (?) to 1.0 
> and the change from 1.0 to 2.0.
> 
> Are there going to be any other 1.x or 2.x versions of D?

Not sure if the version numbers are any good indication, at least
it hasn't been for DMD... Sometimes a feature does a "backflip"
from a later version and gets re-released as an earlier version.

At least that is what happened with the "string" alias and the
two variants of DMD 1.015 available, I'm sure it could happen again.
So the remaining workaround is to detect at runtime, like autoconf...

And of course, the language spec is still missing a lot from GDC.

> If so, what level of advance in the language would be right to warrant 
> such a number assigned to a version of the language, as opposed to the 
> compiler?
> 
> If not, why are the versions referred to as 1.0 and 2.0, rather than 
> simply 1 and 2?

I blame Web 2.0 for that. But thought they were mostly "D" and "D2".

Afaik, the original language release was D 1.000 anyway, and not 1.0

--anders