On 7/16/2016 7:17 PM, Andrew Godfrey wrote:
I'm more interested in engaging on "in how many years will the D leadership be interested in engaging on the topic of D3?" I feel this is a significant omission from the vision doc, and that omission inflames a lot of the recurring animosity I see on the forums. Even an answer of "never" would be a significant improvement over "we refuse to engage on that". And I doubt you're really thinking "never".
There are no plans for D3 at the moment. All plans for improvement are backwards compatible as much as possible. D had its wrenching change with D1->D2, and it nearly destroyed us.
I do think that ideas from academia will mostly cause a lot of unwanted noise in such a discussion - because academia, in my experience, is more focused on "software construction" than on "software evolution", and D takes an approach that is built on practical experience with evolution. But academia also has occasional nuggets of extreme value.
Academia certainly does have value for us. Andrei has a PhD in computer science, I have a BS in mechanical and aerospace engineering, and I believe the difference in our backgrounds makes for great complementary skills.
