Proposal: Relax rules for 'pure'

[Tomek Sowiński]

Gary Whatmore napisał:

> We could use these proposals as a base for D 2.5 or D 3.0. Now that a
> better purity/constness system seems to solve problems more easily, D 2.0
> seems too limited for modern systems programming. Is it finally time to
> put D 1.0 to rest, D 2.0 in maintenance mode, and concentrate on D 3? The
> TDPL book was finally published and D 2.0 has been in bugfix mode for a
> while. Once we have a 64-bit compiler ready, it would be time to move on.

As much as I'd like the new proposals, the focus and resources should be dead-on making 
D2 usable. Make a few stiches if necessary but it must be able to walk on its own, then carry 
the weight of industrial software development on its back.

Most of these proposals come up because people can write increasingly serious code in D. 
Before that these problems were never stumbled upon. Real production code will surely 
reveal new weakspots untractible in small grass-root projects and D creators and Phobos 
programmers will have to allocate time to address them. Surprisingly, it should make D3 
better because we'll know what's wrong with D2. We don't really know that now.

-- 
Tomek