• Daren Scot Wilson (5/5) May 06 2015 Someone looks at a chunk of D code of murky origin. Possibly, it
• weaselcat (4/9) May 06 2015 a lot of keywords(pure,nothrow, shared, etc) aren't available in
• rumbu (4/9) May 06 2015 keywords - lack of pure @safe nothrow @nogc immutable __gshared
• ketmar (2/3) May 07 2015 phobos' std.xml, std.variand and std.bitmanip are D1! ;-)=

"Daren Scot Wilson" <darenw darenscotwilson.com> writes:

Someone looks at a chunk of D code of murky origin.  Possibly, it 
is old, maybe D1 not D2.  Inadequately commented, believe it or 
not, and not other information.

What are some easy to spot details in the syntax by which the 
onlooker can know it's D1 not D2?

"weaselcat" <weaselcat gmail.com> writes:

On Wednesday, 6 May 2015 at 07:56:53 UTC, Daren Scot Wilson wrote:
 Someone looks at a chunk of D code of murky origin.  Possibly, 
 it is old, maybe D1 not D2.  Inadequately commented, believe it 
 or not, and not other information.

 What are some easy to spot details in the syntax by which the 
 onlooker can know it's D1 not D2?

a lot of keywords(pure,nothrow, shared, etc) aren't available in 
D1 afaik, you generally see those sprinkled all over any modern D 
code.

"rumbu" <rumbu rumbu.ro> writes:

On Wednesday, 6 May 2015 at 07:56:53 UTC, Daren Scot Wilson wrote:
 Someone looks at a chunk of D code of murky origin.  Possibly, 
 it is old, maybe D1 not D2.  Inadequately commented, believe it 
 or not, and not other information.

 What are some easy to spot details in the syntax by which the 
 onlooker can know it's D1 not D2?

keywords - lack of pure  safe nothrow  nogc immutable __gshared
strings - use of d|w|char[] instead of d|w|string
operators - use of old operator overloads: opCom, opAdd, opSub ...

ketmar <ketmar ketmar.no-ip.org> writes:

On Wed, 06 May 2015 14:26:43 +0000, rumbu wrote:

 operator overloads: opCom, opAdd, opSub ...

phobos' std.xml, std.variand and std.bitmanip are D1! ;-)=