bearophile wrote:
How difficult do you think that would be for the compiler devs to implement in the
semantic sense? Assuming it can be done without major hardship or compromising
the design of the language, that would be really cool.<
They are easy to implement. Even the lazy ones. See ShedSkin "compiler".
I figured the eager ones wouldn't be a problem, but I wondered whether
the lazy ones might be a pain. Guess not, so cool. :)
We can talk about them again for D3. At the moment D2 needs less new features
and better implementation/debugging of the already present features.
That's very true...I'm looking forward to Andrei's book, but I can't
imagine how he's finishing it on schedule, considering how quickly both
the language itself and the compiler are evolving. If the language
specification and reference compiler are both as incomplete, volatile,
and partially implemented as they are now, a June release might do some
real damage to D's reputation.
As far as D3 goes though: Obviously nothing about it has really been
discussed at length, but is the general idea that it would be another
backwards-incompatible overhaul, or is the plan to make D2 the target
for backwards compatibility from here on out?
