On 17 October 2016 at 15:02, Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d
<digitalmars-d@puremagic.com> wrote:
> On 10/16/2016 3:17 PM, deadalnix wrote:
>> Long story short, it si clearly a waste of time. Qualifying the process
>> would be
>> an understatement.
>> Some specifically DIP27 has been written in Feb 2913, following various
>> discussion at that time. I pushed it at the time. I moved it to the new
>> git DIP
>> repository. Got mostly irrelevant feedback (Hi Martin) and more generaly
>> the
>> loop time is measured in month.
> The wiki DIP27 is here:
>   https://wiki.dlang.org/DIP27
> listed as a draft, last change Sep 2014. I don't see it in the new DIP
> repository:
>   https://github.com/dlang/DIPs
> either submitted, approved, or in a PR.
>> I'm doing this on my free time. I have other things to do.
>> The DIP process is beyond broken. It essentially goes as :
>>  - If you are Andrei or Walter, then your DIP is just a formality. No
>> matter how
>> bad it is, it is in (Hi DIP25, inout turned out so great for type
>> qualifier we
>> clearly need that for lifetime).
>>  - If anybody else does it, you have no idea what you are getting into.
>> You'll
>> be still there in 5 years with no end in sight.
> Here's the list of approved DIPs. (It's a short list.)
>   https://github.com/dlang/DIPs/blob/master/DIPs/archive/README.md
>> I've been a sucker for long enough. I'm not playing anymore and I'd
>> suggest to
>> anyone playing to stop. I've probably be playing longer than pretty much
>> anyone
>> here. Trust the bitter old man, he knows.
> I know it's hard to get any language changes approved. Arguably, it should
> be hard. For better or worse, it also takes those who believe in it to
> promote it, convince others of its value, and get behind it an push, hard.

You mean like that time I spent at least 2 years fighting for
final-by-default, won over the entire community except for a single
person who said they were indifferent (who I forget who was).
Even you begrudgingly conceded (or at least appeared to), the change
was implemented, reviewed, merged, and then Andrei appeared back from
holiday or wherever, and got angry that it happened in his absence and
said he would *never* approve such a thing, and immediately reverted
the patch...?

One of the most democratic experiences of my life ;)

I would be involved in the 'scope' DIP, but I fear my contribution
would work against my interests. I'm currently unhappy with it, but I
don't really care anymore. I've lost sight of the dream ;)
I just want to be able to pass an rvalue to a function that receives a
const ref... that's why I came to this forum in the first place like,
7 years ago. 7 years later... still can't.

Reply via email to