January 13, 2020 Re: DIP 1024---Shared Atomics---Accepted | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Manu | On 1/10/2020 2:48 PM, Manu wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 9, 2020 at 6:35 PM Walter Bright via
> Digitalmars-d-announce <digitalmars-d-announce@puremagic.com> wrote:
>>
>> On 1/7/2020 6:31 PM, Manu wrote:
>>> It will still do that, either now... or later. So, why wait?
>>
>> Because customers have their own schedules.
>
> Customers update their compilers according to their schedules, and
> they can use `-revert` if they're not ready to migrate, that's the
> whole point...
> You didn't answer me though, if it's accepted, and it's implemented...
> why not enable it? and when will we do it?
> Explain the reason for the delay or choice in timing? The transition
> you describe must happen at some time... and delay changes nothing;
> the transition is exactly the same.
We decided a couple years ago to implement disruptive new features first with -preview=feature, and some time later make it the default and have a -revert=feature.
So far, it has worked well. I don't see any reason to change it.
|
January 13, 2020 Re: DIP 1024---Shared Atomics---Accepted | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Walter Bright | On Mon, Jan 13, 2020 at 1:40 AM Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d-announce <digitalmars-d-announce@puremagic.com> wrote: > > On 1/10/2020 2:48 PM, Manu wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 9, 2020 at 6:35 PM Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d-announce <digitalmars-d-announce@puremagic.com> wrote: > >> > >> On 1/7/2020 6:31 PM, Manu wrote: > >>> It will still do that, either now... or later. So, why wait? > >> > >> Because customers have their own schedules. > > > > Customers update their compilers according to their schedules, and > > they can use `-revert` if they're not ready to migrate, that's the > > whole point... > > You didn't answer me though, if it's accepted, and it's implemented... > > why not enable it? and when will we do it? > > Explain the reason for the delay or choice in timing? The transition > > you describe must happen at some time... and delay changes nothing; > > the transition is exactly the same. > > We decided a couple years ago to implement disruptive new features first with -preview=feature, and some time later make it the default and have a -revert=feature. > > So far, it has worked well. I don't see any reason to change it. Yes, but we've had the -preview for close to a year now... I'm asking what "some time later" means? Obviously the lib needs to be fixed (that Rainer pointed out). |
Copyright © 1999-2021 by the D Language Foundation