On Thursday, 17 November 2016 at 11:37:09 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
Disposition: REJECT. A proposal for a similar or identical feature would need to be include qualitatively new motivation/evidence of usefulness.

Please follow the link for the full review text / rationale: https://github.com/dlang/DIPs/blob/master/DIPs/DIP1002.md#review

Regardless of the outcome, I just want to commend whoever wrote the rejection text* on doing such a clear and comprehensive job. I'm sure it must be disappointing for a DIP author to have it rejected, but detailed, constructive criticism like this would - for me at least - make the experience worthwhile and encourage further contributions of higher quality.

* I see dicebot committed, but I'm presuming Walter &| Andrei had a lot of input and I think i detect recent exposure to the academic review process...

Reply via email to