On Thursday, 3 January 2013 at 23:57:19 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
This has been discussed, but I'm pretty sure nothing was really
conclusive (especially when I read about auto ref).
And even if it was, how come that this isn't advertised with
some big red sign ? If a person that read the newsgroup like me
didn't see that coming, what about any regular D user ?
I have several times now pointed out in different threads that we
have a *big* problem concerning the lack of a process for
defining and implementing the D specification. It is very
encouraging that we're now attempting to solve some big issues
with the development and release process, but it only concerns
the branching methods and movement of new code into a stable
form. The next big ticket, which IMO is much more significant a
change, is to define a process for managing the D specification
in a more sensible way, in fact there is no process that I'm
aware of, and if there is one it's totally dysfunctional.
At some point this problem has to be dealt with as it's a massive
inhibitor for anyone to take D seriously. For example, try
downloading the specification and you'll get http 404, or you get
a link to some ancient crap from Amazon for .99 cents - seriously!
Try finding the most current version of the specification (there
is no version to speak of). What's being proposed for the next
big change? There's are DIPS, but where are they and how are they
linked to the endless discussions surrounding them? Etc.
I hope this major issue gets serious attention in the new year
after 2.061 is released.
--rt
