On Thu, 9 Nov 2006, Walter Bright wrote:

> We'll release it one way or another Jan 1. And then we'll move on!

Walter,

Can you clarify for the rest of us what you consider this milestone meaning / containing?  What changes at that point in time?  What do you consider finished, frozen, whatever?

This has come up each time a 1.0 point has been suggested, with lots of potential things to fall into the bucket, but I don't recall ever seeing your point of view.

I'm purposely not including my thoughts or any of the past thoughts from other people since I'm seeking a fairly complete response from you rather than a short agreement sort of answer.

Thanks,
Brad

"Pragma" <ericanderton@yahoo.removeme.com> wrote in message news:ej04f8$1d6s$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> Does that mean that I can start printing t-shirts?
>
> http://www.zazzle.com/pramga/product/235223788036545236
>

Hah!  I love how the locations on the back are all taken from the D frappr group.  New Freedom, PA, represent!

Brad Roberts wrote:
> Can you clarify for the rest of us what you consider this milestone meaning / containing?  What changes at that point in time?  What do you consider finished, frozen, whatever?
> 
> This has come up each time a 1.0 point has been suggested, with lots of potential things to fall into the bucket, but I don't recall ever seeing your point of view.
> 
> I'm purposely not including my thoughts or any of the past thoughts from other people since I'm seeking a fairly complete response from you rather than a short agreement sort of answer.


Feature complete is one of those mirage things, the list of what needs to be added to D is never ending and ever changing. So my intention is to straighten out what we've got now as best I can, call it 1.0, and we can all move on doing continuous improvement.

On Thu, 09 Nov 2006 12:08:50 -0800, Walter Bright <newshound@digitalmars.com> wrote:

>We'll release it one way or another Jan 1. And then we'll move on!

Thanks, Walter. That's the right thing to do.

Walter Bright wrote:
> Brad Roberts wrote:
>> Can you clarify for the rest of us what you consider this milestone meaning / containing?  What changes at that point in time?  What do you consider finished, frozen, whatever?
>>
>> This has come up each time a 1.0 point has been suggested, with lots of potential things to fall into the bucket, but I don't recall ever seeing your point of view.
>>
>> I'm purposely not including my thoughts or any of the past thoughts from other people since I'm seeking a fairly complete response from you rather than a short agreement sort of answer.
> 
> 
> Feature complete is one of those mirage things, the list of what needs to be added to D is never ending and ever changing. So my intention is to straighten out what we've got now as best I can, call it 1.0, and we can all move on doing continuous improvement.

I'm not fishing for new features to be included.  Quite the opposite actually, considering how little time there is between now and jan 1. I'll spell out a little more for the type of info I'm looking for, almost exclusively based on past threads on 1.0 topics:

1) is jan 1 a branch point for the language spec?  the compiler?  both?

2) if it includes the compiler, are there going to be release candidates?  before or starting on jan 1?

3) if it includes the spec, I assume that you'll (and hopefully the community) will be spending time doing a thorough review of it both as it stands and as it is reflected in the compiler.

4) if it's the compiler and NOT the spec, what's that mean for the spec?

5) if it's the sped and not the compiler, when might the compiler be frozen to match the spec?

... there's bound to be more answerable questions that stem from these first few.

Clearer?

Later,
Brad

Walter Bright wrote:
> We'll release it one way or another Jan 1. And then we'll move on!

Assuming that Jan 1 is a target date for dmd, it'd be really really nice for dgcc to have a nearly simultaneous release.  I have been and continue to be interested / willing to help, but all my past efforts at merging dmd into dgcc have been wasted effort.

David, how can the community help you work on dgcc effectively?  You've personally re-done the merges that others have done.  There's a huge set of people that want to see dgcc kept current and to expand it's currently supported set of platforms.  What needs to be done to make that community capable of actually getting changes submitted?

You obviously don't have the personal bandwidth to stay super up to date, and that's not a failing, it's a reality.  No one wants to fork dgcc, but the current single point of failure / bottlenecks is a weak point in keeping dgcc progressing at the pace that D progresses.

Thoughts?

Thanks,
Brad

Brad Roberts wrote:

> David, how can the community help you work on dgcc effectively?  You've personally re-done the merges that others have done.  There's a huge set of people that want to see dgcc kept current and to expand it's currently supported set of platforms.  What needs to be done to make that community capable of actually getting changes submitted?

I'm also looking for some way to include/merge the packages from
gdcwin/gdcmac/gdcrpm into the main GDC site and GDC distribution...

--anders

Brad Roberts wrote:
> Walter Bright wrote:
>> Brad Roberts wrote:
>>> Can you clarify for the rest of us what you consider this milestone meaning / containing?  What changes at that point in time?  What do you consider finished, frozen, whatever?
>>>
>>> This has come up each time a 1.0 point has been suggested, with lots of potential things to fall into the bucket, but I don't recall ever seeing your point of view.
>>>
>>> I'm purposely not including my thoughts or any of the past thoughts from other people since I'm seeking a fairly complete response from you rather than a short agreement sort of answer.
>>
>>
>> Feature complete is one of those mirage things, the list of what needs to be added to D is never ending and ever changing. So my intention is to straighten out what we've got now as best I can, call it 1.0, and we can all move on doing continuous improvement.
> 
> I'm not fishing for new features to be included.  Quite the opposite actually, considering how little time there is between now and jan 1. I'll spell out a little more for the type of info I'm looking for, almost exclusively based on past threads on 1.0 topics:
> 
> 1) is jan 1 a branch point for the language spec?  the compiler?  both?
> 
> 2) if it includes the compiler, are there going to be release candidates?  before or starting on jan 1?
> 
> 3) if it includes the spec, I assume that you'll (and hopefully the community) will be spending time doing a thorough review of it both as it stands and as it is reflected in the compiler.
> 
> 4) if it's the compiler and NOT the spec, what's that mean for the spec?
> 
> 5) if it's the sped and not the compiler, when might the compiler be frozen to match the spec?
> 
> ... there's bound to be more answerable questions that stem from these first few.
> 
> Clearer?
> 
> Later,
> Brad

I am also interested in this information. If we are putting this stake in the ground, lets define what exactly that means.

Brad Roberts wrote:

> Walter Bright wrote:
>> Brad Roberts wrote:
>>> Can you clarify for the rest of us what you consider this milestone meaning / containing?  What changes at that point in time?  What do you consider finished, frozen, whatever?
>>>
>>> This has come up each time a 1.0 point has been suggested, with lots of potential things to fall into the bucket, but I don't recall ever seeing your point of view.
>>>
>>> I'm purposely not including my thoughts or any of the past thoughts from other people since I'm seeking a fairly complete response from you rather than a short agreement sort of answer.
>> 
>> 
>> Feature complete is one of those mirage things, the list of what needs to be added to D is never ending and ever changing. So my intention is to straighten out what we've got now as best I can, call it 1.0, and we can all move on doing continuous improvement.
> 
> I'm not fishing for new features to be included.  Quite the opposite actually, considering how little time there is between now and jan 1. I'll spell out a little more for the type of info I'm looking for, almost exclusively based on past threads on 1.0 topics:
> 
> 1) is jan 1 a branch point for the language spec?  the compiler?  both?
> 
> 2) if it includes the compiler, are there going to be release candidates?  before or starting on jan 1?
> 
> 3) if it includes the spec, I assume that you'll (and hopefully the community) will be spending time doing a thorough review of it both as it stands and as it is reflected in the compiler.
> 
> 4) if it's the compiler and NOT the spec, what's that mean for the spec?
> 
> 5) if it's the sped and not the compiler, when might the compiler be frozen to match the spec?
> 
> ... there's bound to be more answerable questions that stem from these first few.
> 
> Clearer?
> 
> Later,
> Brad

I heartily agree with you Brad, the very least I expect from a D 1.0 release, is that the spec is frozen/versioned/branched. With this follows that either the compiler is branched (which technically might be the best solution), or allows a way to specify which version of the spec to compile for (preferably latest stable spec as default, with some -experimental switch for new features). Without this, there will be _no_ gain whatsoever in proclaiming D 1.0, as users still would have to upgrade to the latest compiler with the newest and greatest just to have bugfixes for the old issues also pertaining to the stable version of the spec.

-- 
Lars Ivar Igesund
blog at http://larsivi.net
DSource & #D: larsivi

OmigodIwantthatshirt!!111!1oneoneleven

Pragma wrote:
> Walter Bright wrote:
>> We'll release it one way or another Jan 1. And then we'll move on!
> 
> Does that mean that I can start printing t-shirts?
> 
> http://www.zazzle.com/pramga/product/235223788036545236
> 
> Wow.. this'll be a great new-year.
> 
> //I know I'm a huge nerd.
> //Yes, I'm okay with that.