On Friday, 19 December 2014 at 14:58:07 UTC, Joakim wrote:
On Friday, 19 December 2014 at 14:38:02 UTC, Tobias Pankrath
wrote:
As for Walter already saying "no" a lot, given how many
features D has, obviously one can still wish he went from 99%
"no" to 99.5%. ;) You don't need to be around the D
community forever to feel that D still has too many features
that made it in.
Care to name a few and justify why exactly those features
should be gone?
No, as that's not really my problem. I was simply trying to
clarify the argument others have made, that the language seems
overstuffed and overwhelming, which I have experienced at times
but I'm not personally complaining about.>
It is a worthless claim to make that there is too much of
something, if you cannot come up with an concrete example. "I've
got that gut feeling, that" is not even remotely an argument and
just kills time of everyone in this discussion.
If we want to discuss the future of the language, it's totally
pointless to do it in an abstract way. “We need to make the
language more stable“ is not a goal or something, it is totally
unclear what that actually means, why this is important in the
first place, how we can say that we have accomplished it or what
we need to do to realise that goal.
