On Sunday, 11 October 2015 at 18:52:44 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
On Sunday, 11 October 2015 at 13:51:18 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Walter and I are happy with DIP25, and the fact of the matter is we weren't surprised more complementary work is needed. So no, I won't acknowledge what I don't believe.


That is an empty statement. What is there to be happy about ?

Also the complementary argument pretty much destroy the best argument you and Walter made for DIP25 : it is simple. I mean, one need to look at the big picture. DIP25 + complementary addition is not simple anymore.

I'd say the one way to get things looked at seriously is to create a DIP. That's no guarantee it will be accepted but there is a guarantee that our chat at DConf is not sufficient even as a basis for further study.


Yeah there are IRL discussion, there are many posts in the forum, there are by mail discussions at DIP25 creation time, there are at least one DIP already.

The only rebuttal to all of this is "Walter and I are happy with DIP25, and the fact of the matter", while everybody else is wondering what there is to be happy about.

Also, I'm sorry but there is no me writing once again a document about what alternative are possible. Spending hours to write documents so that one is answered something along the line of "we are happy with the other thing, but we can't give any reason why" is something I've engaged in several time in already, and has no desire to indulge into this if I have reason to think the same will happen. Your answer here are telling me one thing: it won't be taken seriously.

Reply via email to