On Wed, 24 Nov 2010 22:39:02 +0100 Emil Madsen <[email protected]> wrote:
> On 24 November 2010 21:40, Bruno Medeiros > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > On 31/10/2010 02:47, bearophile wrote: > > > >> Walter: > >> > >> You post lists of features every day. > >>> > >> > >> I hate wasting your time, so please ignore my posts you aren't interested > >> in. I write those things because I like to think and discuss about new ways > >> to explain semantics to computers. Most of those things are for discussion, > >> not for inclusion in D2 (few of them may be included in D3, in the future). > >> > >> > > And how does Walter (or anyone else for that matter), determine if they are > > interested in your posts or not (or anyone else's for that matter) without > > reading them first? > > This is often the case for me regarding posts and threads that discuss > > changes or additions to language features. In these kinds of threads the > > title alone is very little indication of the quality or interest of the > > thread. > > > > > > -- > > Bruno Medeiros - Software Engineer > > > > I must say; I think bearophile usually brings up some good issues, and > things to discuss, and I do like reading his posts. - About not being > interrested in reading his posts, really if you dont wanna read posts, why > are you on a mailing list? - if its the amount thats the issue, then find > some community with low activity instead >.<'. > > And yea, bearophile brings up a lot of nice features, and Walter would never > have a chance to implement all of them himself, which might be good, if > everything bearophile suggests got into the language, we would have this > major language noone would ever be able to learn, nor use. However, if we > succeed in implementing the best ideas I do think we'll end up with a superb > output, however I do think we need to discuss a lot of issues and features, > and thats why I love bearophiles postings, simply because it gives the > community a lot to discuss. > > Just my opinion. - But I do think discussing a lot of features, even the > ones not really related, will help out the language in the end. > I completely share these views. +++ the last sentence. (PL design in general suffers from lack of wide view [I do _not_ mean narrow-mindness, but maybe lack of curiosity, yes ;-)], esp from reproducing misfeatures from the main designer's best known PL language or paradigm. But it's a long and hard task to "un-learn" & re-open one's mental eyes. Design should be choosing from awareness of alternatives, else it's "eyes wide shut"-reproduction.) Denis -- -- -- -- -- -- -- vit esse estrany ☣ spir.wikidot.com
