WTF: dmd 2.066 vs. dmd 2.067 really dangerous code breakage

[Dicebot via Digitalmars-d]

On Wednesday, 22 April 2015 at 11:36:35 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
> On Wednesday, 22 April 2015 at 11:28:44 UTC, Daniel Kozak wrote:
>> This code compile fine under both versions:
>>
>> dmd (2.066, -debug -d):
>
> -d is your enemy, If you remove that, there will be a clear 
> warning "Deprecation: variable XXX.S.FLAG_ON immutable field 
> with initializer should be static, __gshared, or an enum". You 
> decided to ignore and hide it, why the surprise about the 
> breakage?

The changelog entry comes from 2.065 : 
http://dlang.org/changelog.html#staticfields2

It would be probably good to repeat it in 2.067 now that new 
semantics have effect but the fault of ignoring deprecation 
messages before migration is 100% on user.