Comments on: D1/D2 Compatibility Annoyances http://dblog.aldacron.net/2010/01/27/d1d2-compatibility-annoyances/ News and Opinions Regarding the D Programming Language Fri, 20 Jan 2012 13:36:27 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Justin Spahr-Summers http://dblog.aldacron.net/2010/01/27/d1d2-compatibility-annoyances/comment-page-1/#comment-17171 Justin Spahr-Summers Mon, 08 Mar 2010 20:43:27 +0000 http://dblog.aldacron.net/?p=720#comment-17171 I don't understand why version statements don't work like that. As long as they're SYNTACTICALLY valid, why do they have to be semantically valid? I don’t understand why version statements don’t work like that. As long as they’re SYNTACTICALLY valid, why do they have to be semantically valid?

]]> By: ponce http://dblog.aldacron.net/2010/01/27/d1d2-compatibility-annoyances/comment-page-1/#comment-17153 ponce Thu, 25 Feb 2010 18:23:57 +0000 http://dblog.aldacron.net/?p=720#comment-17153 Writing D2 code compatible with D1 seems more and more difficult indeed. I tried to follow the D2 route but quickly realized It's not that trivial. Maybe as __traits(compiles) is implemented, versioned code coiuld be left untouched... I think you should post your troubles in the NG. Tango devs will ran into the same problems. Writing D2 code compatible with D1 seems more and more difficult indeed. I tried to follow the D2 route but quickly realized It’s not that trivial.

Maybe as __traits(compiles) is implemented, versioned code coiuld be left untouched…

I think you should post your troubles in the NG. Tango devs will ran into the same problems.

]]>