On Wednesday, 28 January 2015 at 22:58:02 UTC, Joseph Rushton
Wakeling wrote:
On 26/01/15 22:29, Dicebot via Digitalmars-d wrote:
However my complaint is not about the change itself (though I
personally
disagree with Don reasoning in that issue, it is a delicate
matter) but about
the fact that it is again done as a casual PR and our breaking
change culture
does not seem to change : it is still all or nothing approach.
No automatic
migration tools, no easily found rationale / explanation, no
posts in D.announce
- just an ordinary commit. No wonder any of more notable
change is considered
that scary.
I don't have any disagreement with your request for better
reporting and public justification of decisions like this, but
I don't understand why you consider it a breaking change. It's
not backwards-incompatible -- the existing pure and nothrow
will still work (which I just verified by building druntime and
phobos with a dmd instance built from the controversial commit).
I haven't said it is a breaking change on its own - but that
doesn't mean it is any considerably better migration-wise.
BTW what is @return meant to achieve? I realize I'm not
familiar with this attribute.
http://wiki.dlang.org/DIP25
