On Sun, 28 Sep 2014 14:50:25 +0200 "Leandro Lucarella via D.gnu" <d.gnu@puremagic.com> wrote:
> I'm sorry, but at least the Sociomantic example is not a good one to > defend your point. ok, two companies. ;-) it still beats "noone". > GCC releases more or less every year a new minor version. I think > introducing new feature *just* once a year is super acceptable. Then, > they do a patchlevel release more or less once every 5 months. but gcc package maintainers are not so fast. i still see gcc 4.9.0 on some distros, with it's known bug that makes ffmpeg flac decoder unusable, for example. ah, even gcc 4.8, 'cause "it's proven to be stable and we know it's bugs". > And then you have Python, which has an history of providing a super > stable language that evolves continuously. especially Python3. and i seen real life examples of software that works with python2.5, but not with python2.7. > You got it all wrong. DMD is a compiler implementation and I didn't > see anyone here suggesting to tie DMD releases to GCC releases in any > way. What they are asking for is having GDC merged in GCC, that's all. no, i'm not wrong. i'm talking about GDC, not about DMD. yes, svn version of GDC can get all the freshy fixes and enhancements, but people will use the version that comes with their distro. the old one. when GDC is not tied to GCC, maintaner can build GDC with new GCC backend, for example, and this will not force to upgrade to new GCC (my GDC is completely independed of my GCC, for example). and GDC maintainer can release packages when new GDC is ready, not when the whole new GCC is ready. > > i once dreamt about GDC as part of GCC, but i changed my mind. > You should keep dreaming :) nonononono. ;-) GDC is my primary D compiler, yet i don't want it to be the part of GCC. what i really want is GDC which is synced with current DMD, but this is another story. ;-)
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
