DIP is an abbreviation for D Improvement Proposals, so in theory we should have DIP for every bugfix (if I follow your logic), because it is an improvment :D. No I do not agree with this. UDAs has been added before DIPs and as original author said the definition of UDAs ( https://dlang.org/spec/attribute.html#UserDefinedAttribute) is lame ( https://forum.dlang.org/post/k7afq6$2832$1...@digitalmars.com).So I would say we are talking about fixing implementation not a language change anyway.
On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 5:18 PM, Ali via Digitalmars-d-announce < digitalmars-d-announce@puremagic.com> wrote: > On Thursday, 12 April 2018 at 08:28:17 UTC, Mike Parker wrote: > >> * Changes to the language itself, such as syntax/semantics >> * Changes to the functional behavior of code generated by the compiler >> >> This proposal is a removal of a limitation on an existing feature -- it >> neither modifies existing syntax nor requires deprecation of any other >> language features. Nor does it change the behavior of generated code. >> > > So if this change doesn't change anything, why is it called a change? > > An addition is a type of change and you make it sound as if DIPs are only > required for breaking changes > > I think any change or addition (transparent, minor, simple) that add > capabilities to the language or to the standard library should have been a > DIP > > If the process is too heavy for small changes, add a simple path in the > process for small changes, instead of completely ignoring the process, add > a fast track process for minor changes > > Anyway, good luck, and happy to see D adding features :) >