On 10/10/2014 12:19 AM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
This is the only way to make things happen. Neither you or Andrei are caring about the DIP's people create. They barley get any response at all from you or Andrei when posted on the newsgroups. DIP's are were good ideas go to and die.
I've authored several DIPs, too. That aside, pragmatically most DIPs will not be implemented. New proposals for improvements fill the n.g. every day. Having a DIP that fails is still far better than implementing a feature and having that fail. DIPs, at a minimum, help prevent people from reinventing the wheel, they can take an existing DIP and update it.
D is a fairly complex language, and there's a lot to learn. Shouldn't we be conservative about adding more? I don't know how we can add features to an already complex language at a rapid pace and maintain coherence. I don't know any language that has succeeded at that.
_______________________________________________ dmd-internals mailing list [email protected] http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-internals
