Bruno Medeiros wrote:
> I think Walter is right, the code changes introduced by new features (not bugs) are very rarely backwards-incompatible (even more rarely that they should be, IMO, but that's another story), so I don't see as valid this idea that you have to refactor your code with each new major release. If you don't have time to use, or don't want to use the new features of a release, simply don't, you won't be any worse because of that.

That's right, the changes may obsolete some existing library implementations, but it shouldn't *break* them.

Tiberiu Gal wrote:
> Everything is changing and we're all full of bugs. I'm sure that many look at a 1.0 label as stable!( not just my boss, but I heard people talking on #D irc)
> And we all know D's power, everyone saw the language comparision sheet, we need that sign from Walter "use it, it's stable!".
> I'm not dreaming, I know it won't change the world overnight but it will bring some audience, advertisment, and a handfull of undecided programmers.

I don't agree that D is full of bugs. Sure, the bugzilla bug count constantly rises, but:

1) there are very few regressions, and I put a priority on fixing regressions

2) I think a lot of the growing count reflects more users getting into more heavy use of the language

3) The regression test suite constantly grows with each fixed bug, meaning that the stability is like a ratchet - it moves forward only.

4) The core language is very solid and reliable. The bug reports tend to be on the fringes or are easily avoided.

5) The bugzilla bug count is actually pretty low for a product as complex as a compiler development system.

6) The optimizer/backend/linker are incredibly reliable, having endured the bug fix/regression test cycle for decades.

On Mon, 06 Nov 2006 09:14:23 +0200, Walter Bright <newshound@digitalmars.com> wrote:

> Tiberiu Gal wrote:
>> Everything is changing and we're all full of bugs. I'm sure that many look at a 1.0 label as stable!( not just my boss, but I heard people talking on #D irc)
>> And we all know D's power, everyone saw the language comparision sheet, we need that sign from Walter "use it, it's stable!".
>> I'm not dreaming, I know it won't change the world overnight but it will bring some audience, advertisment, and a handfull of undecided programmers.
>
> I don't agree that D is full of bugs. Sure, the bugzilla bug count constantly rises, but:
>

 I'm saying that there is a bug in everything not that DMD is full of bugs.
I think that we can already use D and DMD, and that the DMD label should be 1.0
because 0.x means "not ready yet" for most of newcomers(and maybe even many of D community members).

-- 
Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/