On Monday, 12 October 2015 at 06:02:47 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
There are not considered because DIP25 is "simpler" and you
and Walter
"like it". As long as nothing changes here, there is really no
point in
wasting my time.
That is a fair assessment. Basically I believe DIP25 is good
language design, and I have evidence for it. The evidence you
showed failed to convince me the design is a hack, and yelling
at me is unlikely to help. Please decide as you find fit. At
some point it is clear that several language designers will
disagree on estimating the quality of something.
If you are wondering why I'm inflammatory, here you go. You are
pulling me the old prove a negative trick. You have good evidence
that DIP25 is good design ? Good, because I have none. And that's
my proof. As long as I have no evidence that DIP25 is good, DIP25
is bad.
Probably git grep in phobos may be a good starting point.
I don't think grepping for return will have a good noise to
signal ratio. You also mentioned several time that you have good
evidence that DIP25 rox. Yet, every time you post that without
any evidence, I'm a bit more convinced that none exists.
