What strategies do library authors have for maintaining two versions of a their code - one for D 1.0 and another for 2.0? When they make changes to one version, do they manually copy them into the other branch? Or is there a way of automating the process?

Version blocks don't seem to help much.

I'm finding it very tedious and somewhat haphazard going the manual route - it's easy to forget, and sometimes I get so carried away adding new code to my 1.0 library that it's a struggle to recall every line I've changed.

Ideally, I'd just update the 1.0 branch and run a script to make the necessary changes for it to compile with DMD 2.0. Do Unix/Linix people use the patch command for this (and is there a Windows equivalent)?

Thanks,
John.

On Wed, 10 Jun 2009 04:30:53 -0400, John C wrote:

> What strategies do library authors have for maintaining two versions of a their code - one for D 1.0 and another for 2.0? When they make changes to one version, do they manually copy them into the other branch? Or is there a way of automating the process?
> 
> Version blocks don't seem to help much.
> 
> I'm finding it very tedious and somewhat haphazard going the manual route - it's easy to forget, and sometimes I get so carried away adding new code to my 1.0 library that it's a struggle to recall every line I've changed.
> 
> Ideally, I'd just update the 1.0 branch and run a script to make the necessary changes for it to compile with DMD 2.0. Do Unix/Linix people use the patch command for this (and is there a Windows equivalent)?

You're correct in that version{} is no help at all. I use a text macro program to help me.

-- 
Derek Parnell
Melbourne, Australia
skype: derek.j.parnell

Derek Parnell wrote:
<snip>
> You're correct in that version{} is no help at all.
<snip>

Prove it.

Then look at the SDWF source.

Stewart.