On 29.09.2016 19:35, Walter Bright wrote:
On 9/29/2016 7:32 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
A DIP should stay as far away from this kind of argument as possible.
Redundancy
of existing features should not be used as precedent and justification
for
adding another redundant feature.
More generally, a problem with existing feature X is not a justification
for introducing more instances of the problem.
This line of justification occurs regularly.
I posit you often just misunderstand what the argument is: It's more
like: restriction A prevents B (B is what you think is bad), but it also
prevents C and D (which are desirable), however, it does not even
prevent E and F (which are arguably bad). Hence restriction A prevents
many valid use cases without even effectively preventing "bad" usages.
