On 7/18/2016 6:48 AM, Andrew Godfrey wrote:
We risk scaring away potential community members, and alienating existing ones, by the way we say "no" to proposals for breaking changes. We could improve how we say "no", by having a place to point people to. Potential topics:
Anything we do will risk scaring away people. The only answer is we have to do what is right.
3) Why we feel that breaking changes risk killing D outright. (I just don't see it. I wonder if we're confusing "dfixable" breaking changes, with other more disruptive kinds (such as Tango=>Phobos).)
Because if you thoroughly break a person's code, you put them in a position of rewriting it, and they may not choose to rewrite it in D3. They may choose a more stable language.
I have many older programs in different languages. It's nice if they recompile and work. It's not nice if I have to go figure out how they work again so I can get them to work again.
