On 13-05-2012 17:35, Stewart Gordon wrote:
On 13/05/2012 16:13, Alex Rønne Petersen wrote:
<snip excessive quote>
On this basis, what should we do? Indeed, what exactly is D2's official
minimum supported version of Windows? Me, NT4 or 2000?
2000, AFAIK. There is currently a pull request to repair Windows 2000
support in druntime.
That would be my inkling. But has it actually been stated somewhere, or
are you just assuming?
Just assuming. Since Windows 9x support was dropped, but not 2000
support (it was broken accidentally), I assume we still support it.
Advantages of keeping the Win9x versioning in the bindings:
- Enables those D1 programmers that remain to write stuff that runs
under Win9x.
- Saves the effort of going through removing it
I think we should just get rid of it. For D2, we'll have to remove the
9x stuff at some
point anyway. And keeping the 9x stuff around for D1 is not worth it,
since D1 is being
discontinued kind-of soon. Besides, does anyone actually write Windows
9x programs in D
anymore?
Probably nobody of significance writes programs to target Win9x now. But
some people are hesitant to move on from supporting a given OS version.
If Mozilla and OpenOffice are still claiming to support Win2000, there
are probably people out there still claiming to support Win9x.
But any people who are programming D for Win9x will already have the
bindings. And if they do an SVN update and find that the protection
against accidentally using Win2000+ APIs on which they relied has gone,
they can update back to the old version. So maybe you're right. Still,
let's see what the others say.
<snip>
If someone really wants to, they can put the Windows 9x stuff into the
D1 branch of
druntime. But let's not put it into master.
There's no "D1 branch of druntime". Under D1, there's just Phobos.
Oops, true. That's what I meant. :)
Stewart.
--
- Alex
