Lars Ivar Igesund schrieb:

> Björn, I might sound pessimistic, but this how how D/DMD always has been,
> and Walter has yet to say how this will change to accomodate the fact that
> we will have a stable release.
> 

I still have to call myself a D newbie and so my opinion is probabely not much worth.  I guess you'll agree that there are allready a lot of goodies implemented in D. So that a nowadays written library will/could survive a few years.

I would like to mention here the gnu classpath lib. (0.92) which uses the Java 1.2 language features and is (again IMO) pretty stableand usefull It also seems that the classpath guys are able to find a way to upgrade classpath to generics without "too" much pain.

Kind regards Björn

BLS wrote:

> Lars Ivar Igesund schrieb:
> 
>> Björn, I might sound pessimistic, but this how how D/DMD always has been, and Walter has yet to say how this will change to accomodate the fact that we will have a stable release.
>> 
> 
> I still have to call myself a D newbie and so my opinion is probabely not much worth.  I guess you'll agree that there are allready a lot of goodies implemented in D. So that a nowadays written library will/could survive a few years.
> 
> I would like to mention here the gnu classpath lib. (0.92) which uses the Java 1.2 language features and is (again IMO) pretty stableand usefull It also seems that the classpath guys are able to find a way to upgrade classpath to generics without "too" much pain.
> 
> Kind regards Björn

Yes, but there Java 1.2 is a stable specification. What I am trying to say, is that D 1.0 needs to be set enough in stone, so that the document/webpage on it don't change on the first new release of DMD. I personally don't think "Just use the compiler tagged 1.0, and you have a stable environment." is good enough, because we _will_ want bugfixes, and we _will_ want to use new (or test) features when they appear (or when they have proved themselves), without ruining the application we spent hours and hours on to get working with D 1.0.

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

Thanks Walter!

By the way, this just happens to fall mid-way (the 12 month of 24 months) within the current Darian Mars Calender (02.Gemini.211). I know it's a Nerdy thing to mention...but I think that its really kool that 01.Jan.2007 happens to match up this way!

For more about the Darian Mars Calender, check out this site: http://pweb.jps.net/~tgangale/mars/converter/calendar_clock.htm

David L.

------------
MKoD D Programming Langauge: http://spottedtiger.tripod.com/D_Language/D_Main_XP.html

Brad Roberts wrote:
> 1) is jan 1 a branch point for the language spec?  the compiler?  both?

Both. The idea is the compiler will get a switch to cause it to be a "1.0 features only" compiler, so bug fixes will continue to get folded in, but new features can be disabled.

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

Basically all the releases from now till then will be oriented towards that. On Jan 1, that's it.

> 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.

The spec will get marked as appropriate when post 1.0 features change.

> 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?

Yes.

Walter Bright wrote:
> Brad Roberts wrote:
>> 1) is jan 1 a branch point for the language spec?  the compiler?  both?
> 
> Both. The idea is the compiler will get a switch to cause it to be a "1.0 features only" compiler, so bug fixes will continue to get folded in, but new features can be disabled.

Yikes.

I'd really rather see a branched source tree, where bugfixes to the 1.0 compiler go into the 1.x branch, and new features go into the 2.0 branch.

For a few versions, it might work to have a single compiler binary where new features and bugfixes can be kept separate simply using passing a commandline parameter to a single compiler binary.

But what about refactorings of existing features. Are those new features, or are they bugfixes? What happens when a particular new feature makes an old feature obsolete?

I know it's a little bit more work to maintain two different branches (though I suspect it's nearly as much work to maintain a whole sandboxed compiler version within the same development branch as the old stable version). Nevertheless, even if it is more work, I think it'd be worthwhile.

--benji

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.

awwwwwwwwwsome, Im getting one - too bad it doesn't come in a sweatshirt

David L. Davis wrote:
> Thanks Walter!
> 
> By the way, this just happens to fall mid-way (the 12 month of 24
> months) within the current Darian Mars Calender (02.Gemini.211). I
> know it's a Nerdy thing to mention...but I think that its really
> kool that 01.Jan.2007 happens to match up this way!
> 
> For more about the Darian Mars Calender, check out this site:
> http://pweb.jps.net/~tgangale/mars/converter/calendar_clock.htm
> 
> David L.
> 
> ------------
> MKoD D Programming Langauge:
> http://spottedtiger.tripod.com/D_Language/D_Main_XP.html

hahah yeah D should set its release date by the Mars calendar :D

Pragma wrote:
> Does that mean that I can start printing t-shirts?
> 
> http://www.zazzle.com/pramga/product/235223788036545236

OMG, cool shirt!!

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

Good! I guess.

But come March and I see D 1.23 released, then we've wasted the milestone. It's the "move on" that worries me. I think we should stop for a while, look at what we've done, and let the surroundings and infra adjust and sprout.

We should stop this target, so that serious critics from the world at large can aim and shoot at us. We really need that. And the publicity with it.

"Optimizing" our web presence is of course good, but we really need some exposure in printed media. There still are folks who are very important to our success, but who aren't full-time surfers and news readers. We need to get recognized amongst them.

And please: libraries and packages! Downloading D should feel like inserting a shrink-wrapped CD -- it just works. And the documentation is there, the libraries work off the bat, and installation is a snap -- on all three platforms.

We have 3.5 weeks to do this. (2.5 weeks of this month plus 1 week. Remember, December counts as one single week, when you look at it in hindsight. Happens every year.)

Oh, and do we have CUJ, DrDobb's, InfoWorld, etc. covered?? Can I see Walter interviewed in each in the January Issue?

Georg Wrede wrote:
> Walter Bright wrote:
>> We'll release it one way or another Jan 1. And then we'll move on!
> 
> Good! I guess.
> 
> But come March and I see D 1.23 released, then we've wasted the milestone. It's the "move on" that worries me. I think we should stop for a while, look at what we've done, and let the surroundings and infra adjust and sprout.
> 
> We should stop this target, so that serious critics from the world at large can aim and shoot at us. We really need that. And the publicity with it.
> 
> "Optimizing" our web presence is of course good, but we really need some exposure in printed media. There still are folks who are very important to our success, but who aren't full-time surfers and news readers. We need to get recognized amongst them.
> 
> And please: libraries and packages! Downloading D should feel like inserting a shrink-wrapped CD -- it just works. And the documentation is there, the libraries work off the bat, and installation is a snap -- on all three platforms.
> 
> We have 3.5 weeks to do this. (2.5 weeks of this month plus 1 week. Remember, December counts as one single week, when you look at it in hindsight. Happens every year.)
> 
> Oh, and do we have CUJ, DrDobb's, InfoWorld, etc. covered?? Can I see Walter interviewed in each in the January Issue?

Very good questions.