• akcom (1/1) Oct 28 2008 For production applications, should I be using D 1.0 or D 2.0?
• BCS (2/4) Oct 28 2008 1.0 (This is what I'm using right now for a production application)
• Jarrett Billingsley (3/4) Oct 28 2008 One point oh. Not only is 2.0 still in alpha (and nowhere near done,
• Sean Kelly (23/24) Oct 28 2008 1.0. But I suggest finding out the differences between 1.0 and 2.0 so
• Brad Roberts (8/9) Oct 28 2008 An awfully broad a question, the answer might well be neither depending

akcom <CppCoder gmail.com> writes:

For production applications, should I be using D 1.0 or D 2.0?

BCS <ao pathlink.com> writes:

Reply to akcom,

 For production applications, should I be using D 1.0 or D 2.0?
 

1.0 (This is what I'm using right now for a production application)

"Jarrett Billingsley" <jarrett.billingsley gmail.com> writes:

On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 7:36 PM, akcom <CppCoder gmail.com> wrote:
 For production applications, should I be using D 1.0 or D 2.0?

One point oh.  Not only is 2.0 still in alpha (and nowhere near done,
it seems), almost no libraries are designed for/work with it.

Sean Kelly <sean invisibleduck.org> writes:

akcom wrote:
 For production applications, should I be using D 1.0 or D 2.0?

1.0.  But I suggest finding out the differences between 1.0 and 2.0 so 
you have some idea what you'll be in for if/when you decide to upgrade. 
  To ease the transition, there are some simple tricks that will help, 
such as labeling ostensibly const function parameters with 'in'.  For 
example:

     void fn( in char[] str ) {}

In D 1.0 this is equivalent to:

     void fn( char[] str ) {}

however, in D 2.0 this is equivalent to:

     void fn( const char[] str ) {}

Since string literals in D 2.0 are immutable, only immutable and 
constant variables may reference them.  So:

     fn( "hello" );

works in D 2.0 so long as fn() is defined as:

     fn( string str );
     fn( const char[] str );
     fn( invariant char[] str );

but not:

     fn( char[] str );

Most of the rest isn't worth the trouble, but I've found this to be a 
real time-saver for making code portable between D 1.0 and 2.0.


Sean

Brad Roberts <braddr puremagic.com> writes:

akcom wrote:
 For production applications, should I be using D 1.0 or D 2.0?

An awfully broad a question, the answer might well be neither depending
on your needs for production.  What are your requirements?  What's your
definition of production?  Based on the original question, you'll
primarily be getting opinions.  With some requirements, maybe a more
objective and informed answer can be formed.

Later,
Brad