bearophile дµ½: > I don't comment on this topic because I am not expert enough yet to see its > possible consequences. > > Regarding D2 development, one of the original design goals of D is to be a > not revolutionary language, but to take what's already known as reliable and > useful from other languages. Bug lately D has become an experiment: it > contains many experimental features that are new, nearly untested in real > programs. Their semantics can be sound, but we can't be certain yet, so some > of those designs may need to be improved on a semantic level too. And some of > them are not even fully implemented. > > I have used D2 for the last few weeks, and I can say that currently the D2 > compiler is so full of bugs, rough edges, or not fully implemented features > that in my opinion it's nearly unusable. I have found a new bug every 10 > lines or code or so (my code is not normal code, I know). When the book is > out people will start looking for a compiler too, so I think it's better to > offer them something that works, or they will lose interest quickly, and then > it will be harder to call them back to give a second look/chance at/to the > language. > > So my suggestion is to focus on removing bugs, performing small local > improvements, to smooth the semantic rough edges, etc. I have listed here > less than fifteen small things that I've added to bugzilla, that I think can > be improved. They are not real bugs, but they are not large new features, > they are usually little local things that smooth corners. > > Bye, > bearophile
Entirely correct ! to support ! Fix bugs, some small features perfect is a priority ! thank you, Andrei grandmaster ! dolive
