What's the current state of D?

[Brad Roberts]

Leandro Lucarella wrote:
> Brad Roberts, el 10 de mayo a las 10:12 me escribiste:
>> Leandro Lucarella wrote:
>>
>>> 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?
>>>
>>> [*] I really wonder how would you call D2 when it's stable. You will just
>>>     say D 2.134 is D2 final/stable? I think this is another problem with
>>>     D, version naming is really confusing and lame. You can't know
>>>     anything from a D version number. And DMD compiler and D specs are too
>>>     much coupled. It would be nice to have separate version numbers if you
>>>     really want to encourage some kind of D standard and compiler vendors
>>>     to start making D compilers.
>> For what it's worth, there's at least one other major product that follows a
>> similar versioning scheme.. mysql.
> 
> At least MySQL uses major, minor, and patchlevel version numbering scheme
> ;)
> 

Mysql uses an x.y.z numbering scheme.  DMD uses a y.z numbering scheme.  With
mysql's x.y being equavilent to dmd's y.  The use of z in both is the same.
Given that mysql's increase of its x.y component being somewhat arbitrary, it
might as well just be one number.

Either way, the transition of the z component through various stages from alpha
to release being at arbitrary points along the number line, my point still
stands. :)

Later,
Brad