I've had about eight people come into the D IRC channel in the past week asking why xxx was failing, or why something they thought should work (constness) didn't.  In every single case, it was either because they read the D2 docs, which are the default (FOR SOME REASON), and ended up downloading the D1 compiler, or because they downloaded the ancient 1.015 D1 compiler which didn't have any bugfixes which have been implemented over the past seven months.

So; this is really starting to come to a head.  I don't know how many people have suggested switching the default D docs to the D1 docs.  D2 is _alpha_ and should be treated as such.  We _need_ to get this resolved.

Secondly, the D1 DMD D compiler download page (http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/dcompiler.html) should be updated to point to the very newest version of the D compiler, or those hardlinks should be removed entirely and simply redirected to the changelog, which is far more up-to-date and lets people know what's been fixed.

*signs petition*

*boycot digitalmars.D till it's fixed?*

Jarrett Billingsley Wrote:

> I've had about eight people come into the D IRC channel in the past week asking why xxx was failing, or why something they thought should work (constness) didn't.  In every single case, it was either because they read the D2 docs, which are the default (FOR SOME REASON), and ended up downloading the D1 compiler, or because they downloaded the ancient 1.015 D1 compiler which didn't have any bugfixes which have been implemented over the past seven months.
> 
> So; this is really starting to come to a head.  I don't know how many people have suggested switching the default D docs to the D1 docs.  D2 is _alpha_ and should be treated as such.  We _need_ to get this resolved.
> 
> Secondly, the D1 DMD D compiler download page (http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/dcompiler.html) should be updated to point to the very newest version of the D compiler, or those hardlinks should be removed entirely and simply redirected to the changelog, which is far more up-to-date and lets people know what's been fixed.
> 
>

yes, and in the same vein, why the new book 'Learn to Tango with D', which is D1, is only announced on the D2 front page?

cheers!

Jarrett Billingsley wrote:
> I've had about eight people come into the D IRC channel in the past week asking why xxx was failing, or why something they thought should work (constness) didn't.  In every single case, it was either because they read the D2 docs, which are the default (FOR SOME REASON), and ended up downloading the D1 compiler, or because they downloaded the ancient 1.015 D1 compiler which didn't have any bugfixes which have been implemented over the past seven months.
> 
> So; this is really starting to come to a head.  I don't know how many people have suggested switching the default D docs to the D1 docs.  D2 is _alpha_ and should be treated as such.  We _need_ to get this resolved.
> 
> Secondly, the D1 DMD D compiler download page (http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/dcompiler.html) should be updated to point to the very newest version of the D compiler, or those hardlinks should be removed entirely and simply redirected to the changelog, which is far more up-to-date and lets people know what's been fixed. 

++votes;


-- 
Tomasz Stachowiak
http://h3.team0xf.com/
h3/h3r3tic on #D freenode

== Quote from Jarrett Billingsley (kb3ctd2@yahoo.com)'s article
> I've had about eight people come into the D IRC channel in the past week asking why xxx was failing, or why something they thought should work (constness) didn't.  In every single case, it was either because they read the D2 docs, which are the default (FOR SOME REASON), and ended up downloading the D1 compiler, or because they downloaded the ancient 1.015 D1 compiler which didn't have any bugfixes which have been implemented over the past seven months.
>
> So; this is really starting to come to a head.  I don't know how many people have suggested switching the default D docs to the D1 docs.  D2 is _alpha_ and should be treated as such.  We _need_ to get this resolved.
>
> Secondly, the D1 DMD D compiler download page (http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/dcompiler.html) should be updated to point to the very newest version of the D compiler, or those hardlinks should be removed entirely and simply redirected to the changelog, which is far more up-to-date and lets people know what's been fixed.

I still agree. D 2.x is different from D 1.x in many non-trivial ways. Many (if
not most) projects aren't on the D 2.x bandwagon yet (Tango is an important
example of this). In future, I expect that the D 2.x projects will be in the
majority but that's months (if not years) away.

And there's no reason to push newbies to D 2.x since I'm sure once they start coding, it will lead to much confusion as they realize that most of the example code floating out there is targeted to D 1.x (and earlier).

Here are some examples of where this has been discussed before: http://www.digitalmars.com/webnews/newsgroups.php?art_group=digitalmars.D&article_id=63051 http://www.digitalmars.com/webnews/newsgroups.php?art_group=digitalmars.D&article_id=60812

"Jarrett Billingsley" <kb3ctd2@yahoo.com> wrote:
>I've had about eight people come into the D IRC channel in the past week asking why xxx was failing, or why something they thought should work (constness) didn't.  In every single case, it was either because they read the D2 docs, which are the default (FOR SOME REASON), and ended up downloading the D1 compiler, or because they downloaded the ancient 1.015 D1 compiler which didn't have any bugfixes which have been implemented over the past seven months.
>
>So; this is really starting to come to a head.  I don't know how many people have suggested switching the default D docs to the D1 docs.  D2 is _alpha_ and should be treated as such.  We _need_ to get this resolved.
>
>Secondly, the D1 DMD D compiler download page (http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/dcompiler.html) should be updated to point to the very newest version of the D compiler, or those hardlinks should be removed entirely and simply redirected to the changelog, which is far more up-to-date and lets people know what's been fixed.
>
>

Again: YES PLEASE.

I've already made two requests in that regard and both have been pretty
much ignored. I don't see any point in distributing an outdated compiler or
promotingD 2.x as "current" version. As Jarrett said, it is everything but stable
or complete.
-- 
Alexander Panek

On Jan 30, 2008 1:50 PM, jcc7 <technocrat7@gmail.com> wrote:
> And there's no reason to push newbies to D 2.x since I'm sure once they start coding

It was the other way round for me. I saw the docs (for D2) and thought "Oooh - look at all the cool new features!".

So I downloaded D, and it didn't work. Turned out it was because I'd downloaded D1. I had to ask on this forum before I could figure out how to download D2 and hence get the cool new features.

I'm not to argue "Newbies should get D2". But equally, I think the rule "Newbies should get D1" is just as wrong. Ideally, the front page should explain that there are two versions, and then there should be two links - one taking you to the latest D1 download and docs, the other taking you the latest D2 download and docs.

But it helps /nobody/ to have the default docs and the default download be mutually inconsistent!

vote++

On Tue, 29 Jan 2008 23:50:01 -0500, Jarrett Billingsley wrote:

> I've had about eight people come into the D IRC channel in the past week asking why xxx was failing, or why something they thought should work (constness) didn't.  In every single case, it was either because they read the D2 docs, which are the default (FOR SOME REASON), and ended up downloading the D1 compiler, or because they downloaded the ancient 1.015 D1 compiler which didn't have any bugfixes which have been implemented over the past seven months.
> 
> So; this is really starting to come to a head.  I don't know how many people have suggested switching the default D docs to the D1 docs.  D2 is _alpha_ and should be treated as such.  We _need_ to get this resolved.
> 
> Secondly, the D1 DMD D compiler download page (http://www.digitalmars.com/d/1.0/dcompiler.html) should be updated to point to the very newest version of the D compiler, or those hardlinks should be removed entirely and simply redirected to the changelog, which is far more up-to-date and lets people know what's been fixed.

I'm going to pitch in a vote here too. It really does not make sense.