What's the current state of D?

[Walter Bright]

Leandro Lucarella wrote:
> Walter Bright, el  9 de mayo a las 22:05 me escribiste:
>> Leandro Lucarella wrote:
>>> Official? I don't see any official support for D in GDB. I can only find
>>> this patches:
>>> http://www.dsource.org/projects/gdb-patches/
>> Dwarf has an official value for the language, DW_LANG_D = 0x13.
> 
> I'm talking about GDB. GDB has no official D support.

GDB officially supports Dwarf, and Dwarf officially has a D identifier. 
While gdb may not go any further than that, it's a start.

> There was a thread
> in the NG asking for possible copyright issues to include the GDB patch
> upstream, and it had no answer for example. I don't think you *have* to
> answer that mail, but I think helping this kind of things happening
> instead of ignoring them is good for D promotion too =)

Can you point me to that thread? There are an awful lot of posts, and I 
miss things.


>>> How is that? Most runtime code is not used by the user directly. And for
>>> this item I think not merging it does more damage than introducing
>>> a breaking change (is much better to introduce a breaking change to solve
>>> this problem than to add a predefined Posix version ;).
>> Tango chose to use a number of incompatible names and a fundamentally
>> different class hierarchy for the same thing(s).
> 
> How many people is using that? How bad would it be to call the next
> version of DMD that include the Tango/Druntime runtime D 1.100 or
> something (is really hard to pick right version numbers under the version
> scheme you use[*]) to make clear there is compatibility break in that
> version?

Given all the beating of breasts and rending of robes about D1 not being 
stable and breaking code even when a bug is fixed in it, I just can't 
see coming out with a new D1 that substantially breaks every existing D1 
code base.


> Seriously, there were several (silly) compatibility breaks since 1.0 was
> out, I think is a huge issue that deserves it...

This is what I mean when I say that it's simply impossible to ask for 
breaking changes for D1 while pillorying D1 for breaking changes. I also 
believe it is impractical to divide D1 into two incompatible versions - 
then there'd be 3 D versions to simultaneously support.

D2 has already taken the steps necessary to support both Phobos and Tango.