Robert wrote: > When reading stuff, like: "Yes this is bad, but people use it already, > so we could only possible change this in D3 or something" and reading > endless discussions about a new feature (e.g. ref semantics) of how it > could break things and so on, I thought it might be a good idea to > implement new features in an experimental version, which can then be > thoroughly tested and only if nothing bad found they will be merged in > the stable branch. People simply have to be aware that they should not > rely on semantics implemented in experimental. > > Discussions about new features before their are implemented would of > course still be a very good idea, but it would reduce the pressure a > bit, because you can simply try. This does not solve everything, because > some issues will only pop up if used for a long time or only in real > complicated production code, but I think it is better than the approach > of having no way back? > > I don't believe this idea is entirely new or maybe I am missing > something. What do you think?
Sounds useful to me. How would you implement it? I fear it complicates the compiler a lot and hence introduces bugs. Jens
