DIP66 has been approved contingent to a few amendments as noted

[eles via Digitalmars-d]

On Sunday, 28 December 2014 at 22:37:48 UTC, Joseph Rushton 
Wakeling via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On 28/12/14 21:08, eles via Digitalmars-d wrote:

>> Except that porting this subset to its own takes quite some 
>> time for
>> Sociomantics...
>
> Porting a large codebase, with high performance requirements, 
> through a large number of breaking changes, many of which cause 
> silent changes in program behaviour ... it's going to take

It was simply ironic. If D1 was a subset of D2, the porting would 
have been immediate: install a D2 compiler and that's all. There 
is no such subset. It looks like one, that's another matter.

> time.  It would be much more straightforward to port a codebase 
> through a sequence of individual, well-defined breaking changes.

And? Isn't that exactly what I was saying? With so much 
featuritis, porting is such a mess that one might better attempt 
a complete rewrite. Why all deprecated and unfinished features if 
they are not even good at porting legacy code?