On Fri, Jan 23, 2026, at 1:24 PM, Edmond Dantes wrote: > Hello > >> This proposal is *huge*, and subsequent drafts are often very heavily >> modified, > > This proposal used to be huge, but it no longer is. The current > version contains a fairly simple API with a minimal set of functions. > The conceptual core of the RFC can be described in just two or three > sentences. > It’s also worth taking into account that the RFC does not propose > anything new to the programming world. The principles are well known, > and existing analogues already exist. This is very important from a > comprehension standpoint. > >> and subsequent drafts are often very heavily modified, so that means people >> need to spend an hour or two each time there's a change fully digesting it. > > At least since the summer revision, the RFC has not changed > significantly. Most importantly, its core principles have remained > exactly the same for a long time. Version 1.7 is a purely incremental > change, which is clearly reflected in the history.
According to my browser, the RFC will take 55 minutes to read. Add time to actually understand it, digest it, and form an opinion and feedback worth sharing, and you're talking 2-3 hours. I am going to attempt to take that time on this draft in the next few days, but please don't pretend that it's not a large undertaking for those who haven't been living and breathing this RFC for the past year. It may well be necessary for a project of this size; I am familiar with that. :-) But that is an inevitable friction point. --Larry Garfield
