On Saturday, 20 April 2013 at 14:42:57 UTC, Namespace wrote:
That is true, but it makes the impression that, with the
exception of Kenji, none of the core developers is interested
in a solution to this problem.
I don't think that's true.
The DIP was not much discussed and the pull request is
regularly overlooked / ignored.
Patience!
Also in the discussion on the pull request no comments for
Walter or Andrei are found. Although the pull is complete and
has passed all the tests and would be ready to merge.
Also this thread is completely ignored even though both write
in this forum regularly and participate in other discussions.
To me this makes the impression that they were not interested
in this problem (or in our solution to the problem). Either
they want the problem does not solve or try to solve it in
their own way and that can take a very long time.
At least an annotation what of both is the case or if I see it
completely wrong, would be polite.
But someone besides me would need to evaluate both DIP 35 & 36
to see if there were any real conflicts there.
Yes that would be good.
I think you've done a good job with the feature and the
presentation.
But I personally don't feel like it's my job to rush D's
development. Part of the reason is that D is already way ahead of
most if not all of the competition in terms of sheer language
design. When you extend into unknown territory, it's sometimes
wise just to stay where you are for a bit, to give yourself time
to adapt and build up a foundation.
I don't think your work will go unnoticed or unappreciated. Most
of the time when people don't get back to you, it's because
they're busy with other things. Probably the best thing you can
do is say, well, my work on this feature is done, what else can I
improve around here? This feature and this issue won't go away,
IMO.
