Breaking backwards compatiblity

[Jonathan M Davis]

On Friday, March 09, 2012 14:44:05 Walter Bright wrote:
> On 3/9/2012 2:41 PM, Timon Gehr wrote:
> > On 03/09/2012 11:32 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
> >> This statement is from Linus Torvalds about breaking binary
> >> compatibility:
> >> 
> >> https://lkml.org/lkml/2012/3/8/495
> >> 
> >> While I don't think we need to worry so much at the moment about
> >> breaking binary compatibility with new D releases, we do have a big
> >> problem with breaking source code compatibility.
> >> 
> >> This is why we need to have a VERY high bar for breaking changes.
> > 
> > Most bug fixes are breaking changes. I don't think we are there yet.
> 
> There have been some gratuitous ones, in my not-so-humble opinion. Those
> need to stop.

Do you have any specific ones in mind? There were a number of them to try and 
make it so that names were more consistent with regards to camelcasing and the 
like, but those changes have largely stopped (or at least are well into the 
deprecation process if they haven't been completed yet).

The only stuff along those lines that I'm aware of at the moment is the 
discussion on making some changes to some of the function names in core.time 
and std.datetime, because some people don't like some of them. And no such 
changes have been made yet (though there are people are still looking to make 
some of them).

- Jonathan M Davis