
D 2.093.0 - crazypython
https://dlang.org/changelog/2.093.0.html
======
crazypython
See D 2.092.0 for D's preview support for Ownership and Borrowing.
[https://dlang.org/changelog/2.092.0.html](https://dlang.org/changelog/2.092.0.html)

------
mhd
I really need to do a basic D -betterC project, just using it as a basic low
level language, maybe with a dash of DbC. Probably with embracing some Oberon
concepts (static imports, single return etc.)

~~~
crazypython
You can use D with GC but manually deallocate memory. This let's one use the
GC as a backup.

~~~
WalterBright
The D compiler has a switch where you can select the compiler implementation
itself to use the GC or manual. This gives options when compiling very large
projects (the compiler allows an entire project to be compiled at once, giving
the benefits of total program optimization without needing involvement from
the linker, this of course uses prodigious amounts of memory).

------
svnpenn
> With this release it is now possible to install and activate compilers from
> the Windows command prompt directly.

> Assuming an MSYS2 installation is present in C:\msys64, necessary
> decompression tools can be installed from the Windows command prompt

Huh? I would think the whole point of running from command prompt would be
that MSYS2 is __not __needed. And the reality is its probably not. Someone
would just need to reimplement the Bash script as a PowerShell script.

~~~
johannes1234321
> Someone would just need to reimplement the Bash script as a PowerShell
> script.

... and then maintain it.

~~~
infogulch
Installing MSYS2 to run a bash script is like deploying an A-10 Warthog to
light the fuse for one of those fountain fireworks.

~~~
yetanta
There are much better ways to install things in windows. Such as MSI files if
you need to change paths and registry entries. Chocolatey if you want a
'aptget' like usage, there are several of these types. Using bash to install
something is unique. I personally am a fan of in place portable install,
unzip, run exe, done.

------
tastyminerals
Noice! Reading through the release notes leaves a feeling of D being a mature
language long enough.

If you're looking for magnitutes faster scripting alternative to Python like
once me, take a peek!

~~~
badsectoracula
> D being a mature language long enough.

I do not follow D closely, but i get the impression that the language breaks
backwards compatibility every now and then - i remember some posts here or
Reddit some months ago by someone complaining that Walter Bright introduced
some changes to the language that broke existing code.

IMO a mature language is a language that you can depend on for your existing
code to keep working in a timespan of decades - like C and C++ for example. A
language that willingly breaks backwards compatibility is a toy, not something
to be taken seriously for long term work.

~~~
qznc
The Wikipedia page history section [0] talks about stability. The most
relevant part is this:

> The release of Andrei Alexandrescu's book The D Programming Language on June
> 12, 2010, marked the stabilization of D2, which today is commonly referred
> to as just "D".

In other words, D is backwards compatible for 10 years now. At least, I don't
know any breaks and the little code I have in D never broke.

The transition from D1 to D2 did break backwards compatibility in 2007. The
change is comparable to the Python2 to Python3 transition but in a much
smaller community. Outdated news from that time still pop up sometimes. Maybe
you heard something related to that?

[0]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D_(programming_language)#Histo...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D_\(programming_language\)#History)

~~~
badsectoracula
So basically if i write some D code now it'll keep working (assuming no OS ABI
changes) and compiling in 20 years from today? I'm ok with very minor changes
due to compiler bugs or whatever.

I wonder what that complain was about then.

