Thread overview | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
May 15, 2009 Re: What's the current state of D? | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Leandro Lucarella: >I think this is another problem with D, version naming is really confusing and lame. You can't know anything from a D version number.< Yes, improving such small things is positive. So I suggest to start using a "language.version.releaseStatus" numbering scheme for D2 (and maybe for D2 too). So the current D2 becomes: 2.0.30alpha and the current D1 becomes: 1.0.45 Once D2 gets out of alpha it may become: 2.1.0 Bye, bearophile |
May 17, 2009 Re: What's the current state of D? | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to bearophile |
bearophile wrote:
> Leandro Lucarella:
>
>> I think this is another problem with D, version naming is really confusing and lame. You can't know anything from a D version number.<
>
> Yes, improving such small things is positive.
> So I suggest to start using a "language.version.releaseStatus" numbering scheme for D2 (and maybe for D2 too).
>
> So the current D2 becomes:
> 2.0.30alpha
>
> and the current D1 becomes:
> 1.0.45
>
> Once D2 gets out of alpha it may become:
> 2.1.0
>
> Bye,
> bearophile
I don't think this is sufficient. What we really need is to treat each part of the version as a complex number.
In this way, non-stable releases can have imaginary components to distinguish them from release versions.
So the current series of D 2.x compilers would become D 2i.x. Release candidates would be D 2i.xi. And of course, a stable release which has unreleased modifications could be D 1.x+yi
So much more intuitive than the current system plus a big, red label reading "WARNING: not stable, do not use."
-- Daniel
|
May 17, 2009 Re: What's the current state of D? | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Daniel Keep | On Sat, May 16, 2009 at 11:07 PM, Daniel Keep <daniel.keep.lists@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I don't think this is sufficient. What we really need is to treat each part of the version as a complex number.
>
> In this way, non-stable releases can have imaginary components to distinguish them from release versions.
>
> So the current series of D 2.x compilers would become D 2i.x. Release candidates would be D 2i.xi. And of course, a stable release which has unreleased modifications could be D 1.x+yi
Why restrict yourself to a two-dimensional complex plane when we have quaternions and octonions?
|
Copyright © 1999-2021 by the D Language Foundation