• bearophile <bearophileHUGS lycos.com> Sep 24 2007
• "Jarrett Billingsley" <kb3ctd2 yahoo.com> Sep 24 2007
• Bill Baxter <dnewsgroup billbaxter.com> Sep 24 2007
• lurk <lurl lurk.com> Sep 24 2007
• Frits van Bommel <fvbommel REMwOVExCAPSs.nl> Sep 24 2007

bearophile <bearophileHUGS lycos.com> writes:

I'd like to see some useful small things be backported from 2.x to 1.x, like
foreach(i; 2 .. 8).

(In the Python language the future Python V.2.6 will probably be a release to
backport as much as possible).

Bear hugs,
bearophile

"Jarrett Billingsley" <kb3ctd2 yahoo.com> writes:

"bearophile" <bearophileHUGS lycos.com> wrote in message 
news:fd8gnt$149q$1 digitalmars.com...
 I'd like to see some useful small things be backported from 2.x to 1.x, 
 like foreach(i; 2 .. 8).

 (In the Python language the future Python V.2.6 will probably be a release 
 to backport as much as possible).


No, see, the entire purpose of the split between 1.0 and 2.0 is that 1.0 
won't get any new features.  It's a done deal.  All new features now go into 
2.0. 

Bill Baxter <dnewsgroup billbaxter.com> writes:

Jarrett Billingsley wrote:
 "bearophile" <bearophileHUGS lycos.com> wrote in message 
 news:fd8gnt$149q$1 digitalmars.com...
 I'd like to see some useful small things be backported from 2.x to 1.x, 
 like foreach(i; 2 .. 8).

 (In the Python language the future Python V.2.6 will probably be a release 
 to backport as much as possible).


 No, see, the entire purpose of the split between 1.0 and 2.0 is that 1.0 
 won't get any new features.  It's a done deal.  All new features now go into 
 2.0. 


I agree with Bearophile, not that it will make any difference.

In an ideal, manpower-unlimited world I'd say we'd have 3 versions of D: 
  1) D1.x stable which will not get new features (current D1.x),

2) D2.x which would get new features but do its best not to break old 
code, and

3) "D.X" would be the next-generation "eXperimental" D that breaks with 
backward compatibility (i.e. the current 2.x), and maybe occasionally 
just plain breaks.


But the real world is not manpower-unlimited, and one guy maintaining 
three versions of the compiler is not really feasible.  :-(  And 
maintaining versions 1) and 3) is clearly less of a load on Walter than 
2) and 3).

--bb

lurk <lurl lurk.com> writes:

Jarrett Billingsley Wrote:

 "bearophile" <bearophileHUGS lycos.com> wrote in message 
 news:fd8gnt$149q$1 digitalmars.com...
 I'd like to see some useful small things be backported from 2.x to 1.x, 
 like foreach(i; 2 .. 8).

 (In the Python language the future Python V.2.6 will probably be a release 
 to backport as much as possible).


 No, see, the entire purpose of the split between 1.0 and 2.0 is that 1.0 
 won't get any new features.  It's a done deal.  All new features now go into 
 2.0. 
 
 

Frits van Bommel <fvbommel REMwOVExCAPSs.nl> writes:

lurk wrote:
 Jarrett Billingsley Wrote:
 
 "bearophile" <bearophileHUGS lycos.com> wrote in message 
 news:fd8gnt$149q$1 digitalmars.com...
 I'd like to see some useful small things be backported from 2.x to 1.x, 
 like foreach(i; 2 .. 8).

 (In the Python language the future Python V.2.6 will probably be a release 
 to backport as much as possible).


 won't get any new features.  It's a done deal.  All new features now go into 
 2.0. 




??
AFAIK Tango only supports 1.x ...