On 06/25/2015 11:06 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
On 6/25/2015 12:48 PM, Mathias Lang via Digitalmars-d wrote:
And he's right. It is really annoying to update to a new version and have
perfectly valid and working code breaking because someone had a nice
idea.
Ideally, we should only ever break code that has a bug in it.
I've also been willing to break code if it involves significant
performance, usability, or correctness improvements. Renaming, though,
doesn't provide that.
It might support performance and usability, at least. Usability is
obvious. For performance, just assume the eager version has a nicer,
shorter or more memorable name than the lazy version. (which is the case
now for e.g. join/joiner, split/splitter).
The main issue is that all those name-describing adjectives have no
precise, agreed upon meaning.
