On Wednesday, 24 December 2014 at 22:12:02 UTC, Andrei
Alexandrescu wrote:
On 12/24/14 4:59 AM, Dicebot wrote:
On Tuesday, 23 December 2014 at 15:49:46 UTC, Andrei
Alexandrescu wrote:
Congratulations, Igor! -- Andrei
Good to see that.
It is a big feature though with a notable impact on symbol
resolution.
How about providing it as a separate compiler build for a
release or two
before deploying as part of master?
An emerging pattern (which Walter will effect for dip69) is to
initially make it opt-in as a flag:
dip -dip69 test.d
Andrei
Where breaking changes are self-contained in a separate
compilation sense, I'd rather have a pragma that effects the hole
module.
Especially changes that prohibit currently allowed code could be
incorporated bit by bit.
