On Wednesday, 14 December 2016 at 21:02:09 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
If we keep making breaking changes, we will never have a
significant user base
so the core issue is a direction D developement should go:
1) have a good language, or
2) have big userbase.
it looks like those goals are in conflict now. while i can see
how userbase matters, i also can't see how it matters for me --
it turns out that i got a mediocre language as a result. well,
there are alot of "acceptable" languages out there, and c++ has a
huge userbase and a huge codebase, so it will always win here.
the only way for D to win (as i see it) is to deliver a better
language. and that means dropping support for old code from time
to time, not to stick with bad design forever. also, tools like
dfix can be made to "upgrade" code.
so far being "stable" didn't brought Bick Bucks or Big Corporate
Support to D. yet instead of using that to advance the language,
to redesign features and so on, D is stuck in a hope of getting
some Big Future Support. i may be completely wrong, of course,
but i see the unique strength that D can exploit: the ability to
change.
sure, turning D into "moving target" will make some older code
invalid. but if the author doesn't want to maintain his code, is
there any real reason to use it? with automatic upgrade utility
it wouldn't be that hard to keep the code up-to-date.
i believe that pediodical "cleanups" will make D better, and will
win more users in the long run. so i will continue advocating
"moving target" concept from time to time. ;-)
