On Saturday, 26 July 2014 at 01:24:31 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 7/25/2014 6:13 PM, Mike wrote:
IMO breaking changes are justified if the changes fix a design
flaw in the
language or the changes break code that should have never been
permitted.
Ironically, today I'm being vehemently argued with for both
breaking code and not breaking code.
The fact that you consider this "ironical" means that you have
completely missed my point yet again and don't really see the
"catch 22" problem with current attitude.
(mentioned argument is here :
https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/phobos/pull/2366#issuecomment-50215483)
tl; dr:
- breaking changes are good
- lack of any formal process for breaking changes is bad
- pretending that careful decisions for breakage make big
difference is not understanding the problem
