On 2/25/2019 3:09 PM, Olivier FAURE wrote:
Yes, this DIP was fast-tracked. Yes, this can feel unfair. And yet, it makes sense that it was fast-tracked, because it fits a priority of the project owners (C++ interoperability + reference counting) and project owners are allowed to have priorities. It's not like this DIP was rushed or has major vulnerabilities (the "mutable copy constructor" thing is necessary for reference counting).
And yes, it underwent major rewrites as Razvan can confirm :-)
