https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14704
--- Comment #20 from [email protected] --- (In reply to Ketmar Dark from comment #19) > (In reply to dennis.m.ritchie from comment #17) > > Do you agree that one of the directions D - is to write less code than > > required C++? > nope. Quote of the documentation: `The main "chip" of the language can be considered as an abundance of syntax, intended to reduce the program's source code (templates, mixins, etc.) and a variety of keywords to test and debug code.` http://wiki.dlang.org/Reading_the_documentation_%28in_Russian%29#.D0.92.D0.B2.D0.B5.D0.B4.D0.B5.D0.BD.D0.B8.D0.B5 Many people believe that a short code is a distinctive chip D. If you do not think so, then I have to assume that your quibbles are absolutely groundless. > (In reply to dennis.m.ritchie from comment #18) > > `If we have shorthand syntax for full imports, why there is no option for > > shorthand partial imports? This is expected behavior.` > > > > What is not an argument? > this is not an argument, this is exactly the "i wan't it 'cause i want it". In order to make something better, to find bold argument :) If you like to write 50 lines instead of 10, it does not make you some kind of guru, and the people who come up with the right design to Go - code monkeys. --
