Given:
- The many differences between dmd 2.059 and 2.060alpha, and the amount of time passed since the release of 2.059;
- The fact that there are some 2.060alpha regressions to be fixed still, so dmd 2.060 is not coming out tomorrow;
- And the recent idea of introducing stable dmd releases that include many patches despite not being really a v.2.061 (see the "Stable D Releases!" in D.announce);
- That I think a "languageNumber.majorVersion.revision" numbering scheme is better, more widespread and more useful (where "languageNumber" is 1, 2 and maybe 3, a change in "majorVersion" means something is changed in the language and this calls for changes in user code and this is the point where the stable D releases must include all the patches of the main trunk, and "revision" means just bug fixes and tiny backwards-compatible enhancements that are not necessarily included in the stable D release) (See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_versioning ).

Then I suggest to call the next release dmd  2.1.0 :-)

And maybe in such 2.1.0 it's better to deprecate the features marked as "future" here:
http://dlang.org/deprecate.html

In a Bugzilla entry (6277) I have also suggested another idea (maybe fit for dmd 2.1.0 still) to improve the evolvability of the D language: beside using -d (deprecated features) another way to face those problems is to use an idea from Python, a switch like "-future" that activates language features that will be introduced in future (this also means the "-property" flag gets moved into "-future" and removed, so the total amount of dmd flags doesn't change).

Bye,
bearophile

On Mon, 23 Jul 2012 09:30:21 -0700, bearophile <bearophileHUGS@lycos.com> wrote:

> Given:
> - The many differences between dmd 2.059 and 2.060alpha, and the amount of time passed since the release of 2.059;
> - The fact that there are some 2.060alpha regressions to be fixed still, so dmd 2.060 is not coming out tomorrow;
> - And the recent idea of introducing stable dmd releases that include many patches despite not being really a v.2.061 (see the "Stable D Releases!" in D.announce);
> - That I think a "languageNumber.majorVersion.revision" numbering scheme is better, more widespread and more useful (where "languageNumber" is 1, 2 and maybe 3, a change in "majorVersion" means something is changed in the language and this calls for changes in user code and this is the point where the stable D releases must include all the patches of the main trunk, and "revision" means just bug fixes and tiny backwards-compatible enhancements that are not necessarily included in the stable D release) (See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_versioning ).
>
> Then I suggest to call the next release dmd  2.1.0 :-)
>
> And maybe in such 2.1.0 it's better to deprecate the features marked as "future" here:
> http://dlang.org/deprecate.html
>
> In a Bugzilla entry (6277) I have also suggested another idea (maybe fit for dmd 2.1.0 still) to improve the evolvability of the D language: beside using -d (deprecated features) another way to face those problems is to use an idea from Python, a switch like "-future" that activates language features that will be introduced in future (this also means the "-property" flag gets moved into "-future" and removed, so the total amount of dmd flags doesn't change).
>
> Bye,
> bearophile

This may pose an issue to the dlang-stable project ... Particularly I think we all are still trying to figure out just how it will work. At this point the dlang-stable repos are just forks of D from June 16th, it's essentially just a snapshot of 2.060. Our plan was to reset the repos to 2.060 to clean out any mistakes made during the learning process and then use 2.060 as a the base point.

After that a 2.1.61 makes a LOT of sense, at least for dlang-stable. :-)

However, if you want to make the argument that the June 16 snapshot of 2.060 is a good enough starting point, i'm all ears. :-)

-- 
Adam Wilson
IRC: LightBender
Project Coordinator
The Horizon Project
http://www.thehorizonproject.org/

On Monday, 23 July 2012 at 16:30:23 UTC, bearophile wrote:
> Given:
[...]
> - That I think a "languageNumber.majorVersion.revision" numbering scheme is better, more widespread and more useful (where "languageNumber" is 1, 2 and maybe 3, a change in "majorVersion" means something is changed in the language and this calls for changes in user code and this is the point where the stable D releases must include all the patches of the main trunk, and "revision" means just bug fixes and tiny backwards-compatible enhancements that are not necessarily included in the stable D release) (See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_versioning ).
>
> Then I suggest to call the next release dmd  2.1.0 :-)
>
[...]

It's not majorVersion that is missing from the current scheme,
it's revision.
There already was a dmd 2.1.0:
http://dlang.org/changelog.html#new2_001

On 7/23/12, bearophile <bearophileHUGS@lycos.com> wrote:
> - The many differences between dmd 2.059 and 2.060alpha

Is there a changelog somewhere? The DMD changelog seems to be a year old on github.

On 7/23/12, Andrej Mitrovic <andrej.mitrovich@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 7/23/12, bearophile <bearophileHUGS@lycos.com> wrote:
>> - The many differences between dmd 2.059 and 2.060alpha
>
> Is there a changelog somewhere? The DMD changelog seems to be a year old on github.
>

Also I'm getting a JS error on the changelog page:

"Hyphenator.js says:

An Error ocurred:
Not enough arguments"

anonymous:

> It's not majorVersion that is missing from the current scheme,
> it's revision.
> There already was a dmd 2.1.0:
> http://dlang.org/changelog.html#new2_001

60 major versions is a lot, but maybe you are right.
Then what's a good numbering for the next dmd? Maybe DMD 2.60.0 ?

Bye,
bearophile

On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 12:02 PM, Andrej Mitrovic < andrej.mitrovich@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 7/23/12, Andrej Mitrovic <andrej.mitrovich@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 7/23/12, bearophile <bearophileHUGS@lycos.com> wrote:
> >> - The many differences between dmd 2.059 and 2.060alpha
> >
> > Is there a changelog somewhere? The DMD changelog seems to be a year old on github.
> >
>
> Also I'm getting a JS error on the changelog page:
>
> "Hyphenator.js says:
>
> An Error ocurred:
> Not enough arguments"
>

I fixed that in a pull last night.  Looks like Andrei has deployed it.  It should be gone now. If not, let Andrei or myself know (and what browser you are using).

Regards,
Brad Anderson

On Monday, 23 July 2012 at 18:00:47 UTC, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
> On 7/23/12, bearophile <bearophileHUGS@lycos.com> wrote:
>> - The many differences between dmd 2.059 and 2.060alpha
>
> Is there a changelog somewhere? The DMD changelog seems to be a year
> old on github.

The change log is on the website.

http://dlang.org/changelog.html

and the github repos all use there own dd file. eg

https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/phobos/blob/master/changelog.dd

On Tuesday, 24 July 2012 at 02:11:54 UTC, Jesse Phillips wrote:
> On Monday, 23 July 2012 at 18:00:47 UTC, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
>> On 7/23/12, bearophile <bearophileHUGS@lycos.com> wrote:
>>> - The many differences between dmd 2.059 and 2.060alpha
>>
>> Is there a changelog somewhere? The DMD changelog seems to be a year
>> old on github.
>
> The change log is on the website.
>
> http://dlang.org/changelog.html
>
> and the github repos all use there own dd file. eg
>
> https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/phobos/blob/master/changelog.dd

Ok, I suppose dmd's log is over on d-programming-language.org

https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/d-programming-language.org/blob/master/changelog.dd

On 7/24/12, Jesse Phillips <jessekphillips+D@gmail.com> wrote:
> Ok, I suppose dmd's log is over on d-programming-language.org
>
> https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/d-programming-language.org/blob/master/changelog.dd
>

Hmm I'm looking for the 2.060 changelog, I'd like to know what these big changes are that OP is talking about.