Hi all!

The major D compilers are currently:

    dmd 2.067
    gdc 4.8.4
    ldc 0.15.1

Looks like ldc is still in its early stages. Given the fact that ldc is more then 10 years old (see David's presentation at DConf'13) then this does not really reflect the state of ldc.

I like to do something about the version number. Possible plans I identified are:

- The 2.067 merge gets version 0.99.0 and with the 2.068 move on to 1.0.0.
  (First version with D code in the frontend!)

- Just drop 0. Next version is 16.0

Any opinions or better ideas?

Regards,
Kai

It's better to start with 1.0

jump from 0.16 to 16 is very strange. 1.0 mean ready for usage/production.

Also do you have plans to merge with https://github.com/Syniurge/Calypso ?

On 2015-04-17 07:19, Kai Nacke wrote:
> Hi all!
>
> The major D compilers are currently:
>
>      dmd 2.067
>      gdc 4.8.4
>      ldc 0.15.1
>
> Looks like ldc is still in its early stages. Given the fact that ldc is
> more then 10 years old (see David's presentation at DConf'13) then this
> does not really reflect the state of ldc.
>
> I like to do something about the version number. Possible plans I
> identified are:
>
> - The 2.067 merge gets version 0.99.0 and with the 2.068 move on to 1.0.0.
>    (First version with D code in the frontend!)
>
> - Just drop 0. Next version is 16.0
>
> Any opinions or better ideas?

Are there any plans on how the versioning scheme should look like? I.e. how and when a version number is incremented.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg

On Friday, 17 April 2015 at 05:19:05 UTC, Kai Nacke wrote:
> Hi all!
>
> The major D compilers are currently:
>
>     dmd 2.067
>     gdc 4.8.4
>     ldc 0.15.1
>
> Looks like ldc is still in its early stages. Given the fact that ldc is more then 10 years old (see David's presentation at DConf'13) then this does not really reflect the state of ldc.
>
> I like to do something about the version number. Possible plans I identified are:
>
> - The 2.067 merge gets version 0.99.0 and with the 2.068 move on to 1.0.0.
>   (First version with D code in the frontend!)
>
> - Just drop 0. Next version is 16.0
>
> Any opinions or better ideas?
>
> Regards,
> Kai

What is the point in 0.99? It is not like version numbers in semver are percentages. 0.16.x for 2.067 merge and 1.0.x for 2.068 make most sense to me.

The LDC developers should set criteria for what they consider to be production quality of the compiler.  Once the compiler satisfies the criteria the version can be advanced to 1.x. Anything before that is a beta version of the compiler -- be it 0.16 or 0.256 doesn't matter.  If with the 2.068 move LDC still fails regression tests on OS X or Windows, although these tests pass on Linux, it would be premature to bump the version to 1.0, in my opinion.

Regards,

Dmitri


On Friday, 17 April 2015 at 05:19:05 UTC, Kai Nacke wrote:
> Hi all!
>
> The major D compilers are currently:
>
>     dmd 2.067
>     gdc 4.8.4
>     ldc 0.15.1
>
> Looks like ldc is still in its early stages. Given the fact that ldc is more then 10 years old (see David's presentation at DConf'13) then this does not really reflect the state of ldc.
>
> I like to do something about the version number. Possible plans I identified are:
>
> - The 2.067 merge gets version 0.99.0 and with the 2.068 move on to 1.0.0.
>   (First version with D code in the frontend!)
>
> - Just drop 0. Next version is 16.0
>
> Any opinions or better ideas?
>
> Regards,
> Kai

On Friday, 17 April 2015 at 07:42:49 UTC, Suliman wrote:
> Also do you have plans to merge with https://github.com/Syniurge/Calypso ?

Too early, and it shouldn't be merged as a whole. The bulk of Calypso
should be split from LDC as a shared library and then I'll submit
PRs for the hooks and small changes to DMD and LDC needed by
Calypso.

On 04/17/2015 01:26 PM, Dmitri Makarov via digitalmars-d-ldc wrote:
> The LDC developers should set criteria for what they consider to be
> production quality of the compiler.

LDC has been production-ready on Linux for a long time.

> Once the compiler satisfies the
> criteria the version can be advanced to 1.x. Anything before that is a
> beta version of the compiler

This is not a hard and fast rule. Some counterexamples that come to my mind include DOSBox, dconf and libssh. I agree, though, that pre-1 version numbers might be perceived as less stable. And incrementing the major version counter quickly certainly is the fashion of the day.

> If
> with the 2.068 move LDC still fails regression tests on OS X or Windows,
> although these tests pass on Linux, it would be premature to bump the
> version to 1.0, in my opinion.

I don't think so. Windows can still remain a beta-quality platform target even if we choose a version number that suggests a stable release for Linux. After all, what about all the other platforms out there? FreeBSD? iOS? Haiku? Embedded targets? Case in point: Win64 isn't quite stable for DMD and GDC either.

 — David

On 04/17/2015 10:04 PM, Elie Morisse via digitalmars-d-ldc wrote:
> On Friday, 17 April 2015 at 07:42:49 UTC, Suliman wrote:
>> Also do you have plans to merge with
>> https://github.com/Syniurge/Calypso ?
>
> Too early, and it shouldn't be merged as a whole. The bulk of Calypso
> should be split from LDC as a shared library and then I'll submit
> PRs for the hooks and small changes to DMD and LDC needed by
> Calypso.

In any case, please do let us know if we can do something to make your life easier.

 — David

On 2015-04-17 22:18, David Nadlinger via digitalmars-d-ldc wrote:

> I don't think so. Windows can still remain a beta-quality platform
> target even if we choose a version number that suggests a stable release
> for Linux. After all, what about all the other platforms out there?
> FreeBSD? iOS? Haiku? Embedded targets? Case in point: Win64 isn't quite
> stable for DMD and GDC either.

You decide which platforms are officially supported. Failing tests on any other platform should not block a release.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg

Kai Nacke:

> Any opinions or better ideas?

I suggest to go to "1.0" when you feel ready.

I also suggest to drop the "2" from the ldc/ldmd name.

Bye,
bearophile