On 04/26/2014 09:56 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
I think this is not a good proposal from a "proportional response" standpoint: it squanders a keyword for a minor feature. I also think the preexisting suggestions are each wanting in various ways. That's why we should guide the discussion not in the direction of ranking existing proposals, but instead to acknowledge we have a collection of bad proposals on the table and we need to define a better one.
I.e. your only objection to this is its syntax?
