It seems pretty common to me?! Java is developed that way. So is Rust. And many ...

murkt · 2025-11-08T08:51:09 1762591869

Java and Rust have surpassed 1.0 version a long time ago, so they don’t remove features left and right on each feature release.

Not that it’s a bad thing. Python removes stuff, and it takes time to upgrade to new versions.

Milpotel · 2025-11-08T09:24:01 1762593841

And Zig has surpassed 1.0 or where is the argument?

murkt · 2025-11-08T15:17:03 1762615023

Zig has not surpassed 1.0 and explicitly strives to remove features, which Java and Rust don’t do anymore. That’s why it feels different.

koeng · 2025-11-08T08:48:19 1762591699

I don’t think Java and Rust were so ok with completely removing features. For example, in Zig 0.15 they completely overhauled the io, meaning all libraries now have to rewrite up usage. Just to make sure they did it right

kibwen · 2025-11-08T14:02:46 1762610566

> I don’t think Java and Rust were so ok with completely removing features.

This just shows that you weren't around for pre-1.0 Rust. Back then Rust was infamous for the language making breaking changes every week. Check out this issue from 2013 tracking support for features which were deprecated but had yet to be removed from the compiler: https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/4707 , and that's just a single snapshot from one moment in Rust's prehistory.

reichstein · 2025-11-08T09:00:50 1762592450

Semantic major/minor version 0.15 means it's still in development. It's not supposed to be stable. Going from 0.14 to 0.15 allows breaking changes.

Try making a similar change between version 5.0 and 6.0, with hundreds of thousands of existing users, programs, packages and frameworks that all have to be updated. (Yes, also the users who have to learn the new thing.)

otabdeveloper4 · 2025-11-08T09:00:42 1762592442

> Just to make sure they did it right

Let me guess: they didn't, and now there is a third-party "right" way to do it.

(We've been here before, many times.)