On Thu., 18 Oct. 2018, 7:10 pm Stanislav Blinov via Digitalmars-d, < digitalmars-d@puremagic.com> wrote:
> On Friday, 19 October 2018 at 01:53:00 UTC, Manu wrote: > > > This is a red-herring. > > In short, he made up this issue, it doesn't exist. > > This is just hot air, and only strengthen my conviction. > > >> Produce, or drop this presumptious crap. > > > You are an obscene person. I'm out. > > Oooh, I'm soooorry, come baack! > Really though, what is it that you wanted to achieve here? You > ask for counter-arguments, are given them on *17 pages already*, > are asked numerous times to actually demonstrate the value of a > small contained portion of your proposal, and all you do is shrug > this all off just because you presume to "know better", and on > top of that have the audacity to call someone else *obscene*? > Wow... just... wow! > > > You win. > > I didn't know it was a contest. > I've given use cases constantly, about taking object ownership, promotions, and distribution for periods (think parallel for), I can achieve all my goals with full @safety, absolutely no casts in user code, and I have infrastructure in production that applies these patterns successfully. It's worth pursuing. I've spent years thinking on this, I'm trying to move the needle on this issue for the first time in over a decade at least, and you have violently opposed, in principle, from the very first post, and make no effort to actually understand the proposition. It's clearly a contest from your insurance that my proposal in worthless in every single post you've made. You want me to admit defeat and desist. Fuck you. You win. I don't have the time or energy to argue against a wall. You are obscene, you're complete unproductive, and destructive from no apparent reason. I hope you continue to love shared, just the way it is... useless. >