2 ms·
At the risk of repeating some arguments you've heard, does that really need to be in 1.0? Incremental compilation doesn't destroy backwards compatibility (unlik
by scythe 12y ago
At the risk of repeating some arguments you've heard, does that really need to be in 1.0? Incremental compilation doesn't destroy backwards compatibility (unlike, e.g., moving threads out of the stdlib), and it isn't a "showstopper" feature (e.g. unboxed closures), it's a convenient trick that can be tacked on later. It's hardly the sort of thing that needs to delay stability for the majority of users.
- pcwalton 12y agoIf it's about incremental compilation, this is indeed correct. We've talked about doing incremental compilation post 1.0 and the module system is irrelevant to whether that is possible.