Robert Fraser wrote:
Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
bearophile wrote:
Andrei Alexandrescu:
I don't plan to discuss minor features on this group anymore.
In about two years I've never heard Walter say something like that
(even if may think similar things every day), he doesn't need a
pedestal.
This has nothing to do with a pedestal. It's simple pragmatics. We are
fulfilling Wadler's law
(http://www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/Wadlers_Law) around here, and
that's counterproductive.
Some of language design and most of syntax design are subjective. We
all have a tendency to subjectively prefer features that we created
and to be more critical of features that others have created. It's
natural. They call it the better-than-average bias
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lake_Wobegon_effect). I have that
tendency as much as the next guy, but I also like to believe I do not
let that mask my reasoning too bad. That is, I wouldn't go at any
length to defend a no-win case and argue against others while at the
same time consistently ignoring any explanation given several times
and in several forms.
Case in point: omitting the trailing parens in function calls... I got
destroyed on that one :o).
Andrei
I think the other effect is we don't often have time to think about our
suggestions for very long... Design is a process and something often
"sounds good at the time". Consider the A{} syntax for templates... a
whole newsgroup, a month of discussion, and it took until Walter started
implementing it to realize the syntactic ambiguity.
Having more heads to think about a syntactic change can't be a bad thing.
Good point. "Think" is key :o). I'm sure it's often happened to many of
us to share with a friend something we spent nights poring over, for
them to come with what they're convinced is a much better idea after
dignifying the matter with five seconds worth of thinking.
Andrei
