On Friday, 19 December 2014 at 16:45:40 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad
wrote:
On Friday, 19 December 2014 at 15:11:30 UTC, Tobias Pankrath
wrote:
If we want to discuss the future of the language, it's totally
pointless to do it in an abstract way. “We need to make the
language more stable“ is not a goal or something, it is
totally unclear what that actually means, why this is
important in the first place, how we can say that we have
accomplished it or what we need to do to realise that goal.
Yes, but it would be easy to define some focused goals for each
release and refuse to touch stuff that belongs to a later
release. E.g.
2.70-2.79:
- fix all problems related to private changes in libraries
breaking application-code
2.80-2.89:
- focus on polishing support for applications that use GC and
can take the collection hit
2.90-2.99:
- focus on polishing support for applications that are real
time and don't use GC
- standard lib fully @nogc
- scope etc
3.0:
- breaking change: full clean up of syntax
- non-GC ownership model
- optional precise GC
- remove less important features: lazy, etc…
3.1:
- 3.0 update, supplements features in 3.0
3.2-3.3:
- faster compilation
3.4-3.5
- profiling guided optimization
- whole program optimization
How would that improve the development process? Which problems
that we currently face does that solve and why? I'm not trying to
troll here.
