3 ms·
I can see that, and I've been idly wondering over the past few days what the largest N will be for Go 1.N. The contrast with most version numbering, however, is
by rsc 11y ago
I can see that, and I've been idly wondering over the past few days what the largest N will be for Go 1.N. The contrast with most version numbering, however, is that we've defined a meaning for Go 2: it breaks all your Go 1 programs. Being a Go 1.X release is actually a stronger statement about how your code will behave.
- andrewchambers 11y agoWaiting for the confusion when Go1 2.0 is released :). Or are you thinking of 1.10?
- tagrun 11y ago"Go1 2.0" is meaningless, Go X refers to Go X.Y.Z. Many FOSS programs treat X, Y and Z as numbers rather than digits, and increment X when there is a breaking change in the API or some serious restructuring/change (this is starting to change, recently we see programs incrementing major version periodically [most remarkably, Linux, Firefox, GCC have jumped on this bandwagon], these days only FOSS libraries are seriously sticking to that.) so yeah, it's probably going to be 1.10 and so on.