On Thursday, 13 March 2014 at 18:03:42 UTC, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
On 3/13/14, Andrei Alexandrescu <[email protected]>
wrote:
There must be a way to convey that a decision has been made.
It is
understood it won't please everybody, just like going the
other way
won't please everybody. Please let me know what that way is.
Voting.
Good programming languages have a coherent design, orthogonal
features, a clean philosophy, approach... they subscribe to
chosen programming models such as procedural, functional,
message-passing, garbage collected, dynamically typed, strongly
typed.... as the designer intended. Having a 'they who shout the
loudest win' or even a voting system destroys that coherency and
uniform philsophy IMHO. I don't bother with C++ because I read
Herb Sutter's GOTW column from time and time and think to myself
"I don't want to need to know all these very subtle issues and
gotchas in my programming language". The syntax etc. of C++ I can
cope with. Now, I think that Andrei and Walter are D's best
chance to shepherd D away from the C++ gotcha morass. Voting on
features to change / add would throw D into it. In my view adding
features is particularly pernicious as they complicate the
language in non-orthogonal ways leading to the need to know a
broader and more complex language than necessary.
