What's the current state of D?

[Lutger]

Walter Bright wrote:

> grauzone wrote:
>> But C++ programs still compile and run correctly with C++0x compilers.
> 
> True enough, but that wasn't true for C++98, or C89. Nobody refused to
> use C or C++ because of that.
> 
>> I bet none of the projects on dsource are even compilable with dmd2 (even
>> if they were written for D2.0).
> 
> Take any C++ project from 15 years ago and I bet it won't compile today,
> either.
> 
>> And _many_ projects probably need minor
>> fixes, before they compile with the latest dmd1 compiler.
> 
> Nearly all of those are due to inadvertent reliance on bugs in D1. You
> see this quite a bit in the C++ world. Every time g++ gets updated, I
> have to tweak something in my sources.
> 
> Every binary release of dmd is available for download. If you require an
> unchanging compiler, it's trivial to operate that way. dmd isn't going
> to auto-update itself and break your compiles.

That's a really good thing imho. I remember when I got the Civilization 4 
C++ SDK, it would only compile with the MS 2003 compiler. Which at the time 
was outdated and unavailable for download in a legal way. It was also 130K 
LoC and beyond my ability to fix of course, very frustrating.