version vs. static if

[Daniel Murphy]

"Gor F. Gyolchanyan" <gor.f.gyolchanyan at gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:j5ibrn$2rn8$1 at digitalmars.com...
> Why don't you want D to have a backwards compatibility breaking release?
> D2 got here, but D1 is still out there and gets it's occasional bug-fixes.
>
> Having a backwards compatibility breaking release is a good way to fix 
> mistakes,
> made in the past. Not doing so leads to overly complicated and unintuitive
> language like C++, where new functionality is crammed in with sacrifices 
> to
> intuitiveness.

Basically, because D2 is not ready to be left behind yet.  There are a huge 
number of compiler and library bugs to be fixed, hundreds of rough corners 
to be polished, and huge gaps in the toolchain to be fixed.  To fork D again 
before these issues are better resolved would be catastrophic.