On Monday, 7 September 2015 at 20:55:25 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Monday, 7 September 2015 at 19:06:48 UTC, Prudence wrote:
It's called encapsulation. It prevents namespace pollution and
identifier collision.
This is already provided by the D module system. Even if you
were to define a WM_CREATE in your code, it would not cause a
major problem with the Win32 name because you can disambiguate
via the imports. (That's also a minor hassle, but it is more
rare for these long names than a short name like WM anyway!)
My editor already autocompletes WM_* names anyway, but again,
the D module system can help with that too if you didn't want
the keyword based completion I use for that.
I just don't see any advantage here to counterbalance the pain
of changing it.
Again, it's called progress. Why keep using the same defunct
system for endless years simply because that's the way it was
done?
It's like saying we should never upgrade the space shuttle(not
that it matters any more) simply because the previous one was
working?
Do you seriously think that your logic is the best? If you could
prove that Bill Gates designed the best OS ever possible, that is
one thing... But changes are they shit all over themselves while
doing it because they didn't learn from there mistakes(how could
they, they go in to the future to see what kinda crap came out).
Do you think computers in 100 years are still going to be using
windows? Do you think the designers will still use the same
programming techniques? Do you think they will worship Bill Gates
because think they the messaging model of Windows was the
ultimate gift to humanity?
It's one thing to say: "I'm just too lazy to want to waste all
that time changing stuff to make it work". That's a valid
argument! But it's quite different to say "We don't need to
change because this model works best and any modification of it
will only produce a poorer result". If you are going to use the
second argument, you need to prove it. If you are going to use
the first, don't expect to get anywhere.
I just wish when people say stuff like you have done, you would
be honest and say what you really mean so we don't have to waste
time beating around the bush. A simple "I'm don't care what
others want, I think we should keep it the same because I'm happy
with it". I'm OK with such a statement. At least it's honest and
direct. I might not like the selfishness that it implies, but to
each his own, I suppose.
Oh, and who says you couldn't keep both systems? But I'll never
understand why people think keeping a junker around and NOT allow
something better is a good idea. You can keep your rusted ol'
ElCamino that's missing a tire and has no hood if you want. But
why stop me from having a Ferrari? Is it jealousy? Selfishness?
There's enough gas to go around you know? And if we both arrive
at the gas station we can take turns, if your willing?
