On Wednesday, 12 February 2014 at 04:52:00 UTC, Andrei
Alexandrescu wrote:
Well that should raise a question about the proper priorities.
My hope would be this would trickle down to GDC and I can use
that.
For all the people crying about forking the language, this
will only
fork the language as much as @safe did (ie not at all).
As I told Walter: there's this joke that goes as follows. A guy
goes to the doctor and the doctor asks "How is your sex life?"
and the guy goes, "Almost every day!" "How do you mean that?"
"Almost on Monday, almost on Tuesday, almost on Wednesday..."
"I only try on Wednesday"
We almost have a working @safe, we almost have good reference
counting, we almost have good copy construction, we almost have
a working "shared" qualifier, we almost have a solution to
NonNull, we almost have complete qualifier inference, and we
almost have a self-hosting compiler.
I'm not planning to stop working on the self-hosting compiler,
just working on the same thing constantly gets a bit boring
eventually, and half the time I'm blocked waiting for Walter to
approve something anyway. (Not currently!)
As for the others, I implemented most of @safe, and I don't
really care about the rest.
Last thing we want is to add an almost working "better C"
thingamaroo to the list.
Andrei
The thing is, we do almost have it, because it's not a huge thing
to implement. Low hanging fruit vs long-term priorities.
