Reply to Steve,
BCS Wrote:
Hello Ameer,
Hi all.
When I last used D a couple years ago, 2.0 was the experimental
branch and
1.0 was stable.
still true
Now that I have a little time on my hands I'm wondering: what is the
current landscape? Is 2.0 approaching any sort of stability?
the const system is stable and now it's starting to play with
threading
Are
there still two competing runtime libraries or have they been
merged?
No not for 1.0 (and they never will be) but /when/ Tango gets ported
to 2.0 they will coexist.
Basically I want to know if it's worth using 2.0 for anything of
importance
or is it still in flux?
Don't use it for bet-the-bank code. Use it for, fun-n-games code.
Between them, it's up to you.
Thanks,
Ameer
This is the sort of answer that will kill D. The guy comes back after
2 years, asks a straight question, and get's told "business as usual,
we're still arguing among ourselves about what it should be".
What, should I lie? Of am I smoking something? If what I said is true and
will kill D than we need to fix something. (that said...)
D should be D, not maybe 1.043, or let's wait a while and see what
happens with D2. Potential real users hate uncertainty. If they are
going to commit, then D must do so too.
I don't see how that can be done. For people to use it there needs to be
a stable platform to work with. For it to evolve it needs to be able to make
breaking changers. These fundamentally conflict. The only solution I can
see is that D1.0 is the first and should be used for things that need stability
and 2.0 is the evolving version and shouldn't be used for things that need
stability until it stabilizes.
How would you have it done?
