On Wednesday, 31 December 2014 at 03:25:24 UTC, Manu via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
On the other hand, power just because we can add it is not
always a good
thing. C macros are very powerful, but experience has shown it
is the wrong
kind of power. Also, programmers do not really want a complex
annotation
system. They want to just write code in the most obvious
manner and have it
work correctly. Having a powerful (but complex) system is not
very
attractive.
His point is similar to my other point elsewhere though. I
don't think
he's talking about 'power' in the sense you describe, what he's
really
talking about is consistency or uniformity. His original scope
proposal wasn't 'powerful' (even though it was effectively more
powerful), it was holistic, and without the edges that seem to
have
been introduced to try and 'contain the concept into a smaller
space',
if that makes sense.
In this particular case, I think practical 'complexity' is being
expressed in the form of awkward edge cases, and the reason that
happened I suspect, is precisely what Andrei asked me to do;
talk
about the specific problem case, not the general problem that's
recurring in numerous problem cases.
I feel like the current proposals are to effectively add yet
more
edges to address specific cases, rather than removing the edges
that
are already present causing the problems in the first place.
Address the problem, don't add layers of patches to round off
rough edges.
Thank you, I know what I wrote was kind of abstract, this
describes my thoughts quite well.
