On 28/05/2020 12:33 AM, aberba wrote:
On Thursday, 21 May 2020 at 18:36:51 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 05:49:27PM +, Paul Backus via
Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: [...]
Even if we suppose for the sake of argument that the decision is
sound on a technical level, this
On Thursday, 21 May 2020 at 18:36:51 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 05:49:27PM +, Paul Backus via
Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: [...]
Even if we suppose for the sake of argument that the decision
is sound on a technical level, this is poor leadership, and
bodes ill for
On 2020-05-24 00:15, Walter Bright wrote:
On 5/23/2020 4:26 AM, Faux Amis wrote:
Just a suggestion, but sometimes matters are best discussed over
audio/video. Would having a public teams/zoom/.. meeting be helpful?
I would definitely listen/watch; even if I were muted and could only
chat
On Saturday, 23 May 2020 at 15:07:16 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu
wrote:
On 5/21/20 7:49 PM, Bruce Carneal wrote:
On Thursday, 21 May 2020 at 16:32:32 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Thursday, 21 May 2020 at 16:14:02 UTC, Seb wrote:
Why we can't we have a technical board where the community
can vote
On 5/23/20 6:49 PM, ag0aep6g wrote:
On 23.05.20 17:07, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
A fork does exist. As expected it went nowhere.
https://bitbucket.org/larsivi/amber/wiki/Home. There is a paradox
about forking the language - anyone good enough to lead a successful
fork would also be wise
On 23.05.20 17:07, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
A fork does exist. As expected it went nowhere.
https://bitbucket.org/larsivi/amber/wiki/Home. There is a paradox about
forking the language - anyone good enough to lead a successful fork
would also be wise enough to work on the D language instead.
On 5/23/2020 4:26 AM, Faux Amis wrote:
Just a suggestion, but sometimes matters are best discussed over audio/video.
Would having a public teams/zoom/.. meeting be helpful?
I would definitely listen/watch; even if I were muted and could only chat maybe.
You're right, and that is the whole
On 5/21/20 7:49 PM, Bruce Carneal wrote:
On Thursday, 21 May 2020 at 16:32:32 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Thursday, 21 May 2020 at 16:14:02 UTC, Seb wrote:
Why we can't we have a technical board where the community can vote
in experts and potentially companies could even buy a seat for $$$
On 2020-05-22 03:16, Walter Bright wrote:
The level of negativity in that thread was what caused me to stop
responding, though I continued reading. Every reply I made produced 10
responses, an exponential explosion, and yet I was just repeating
myself. Two sides to every story.
FWIW, I am
Perhaps not the ideal solution, but would a compiler flag, e.g.
--strict-safe, that ensures the compiler errors on un-@trusted
non-D function prototypes be appropriate? This way, those who do
work on mission-critical stuff can feel a tad better.
On Thursday, 21 May 2020 at 23:49:22 UTC, Bruce Carneal wrote:
On Thursday, 21 May 2020 at 16:32:32 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Thursday, 21 May 2020 at 16:14:02 UTC, Seb wrote:
[...]
ditto, I think we should have like a seven person elected DIP
committee who pass/fail things by majority
On Thursday, 21 May 2020 at 13:51:34 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
DIP 1028, "Make @safe the Default", has been accepted without
comment.
https://github.com/dlang/DIPs/blob/master/DIPs/accepted/DIP1028.md
I've made a draft PR to try and address the potential safety
issue discussed in this thread.
On 5/21/2020 4:45 PM, H. S. Teoh wrote:
This makes it sound like you think that those who disagree with you
disagree with @safe by default. That is not the case.
I'm sure you all know what I'm talking about.
On 5/21/2020 2:41 PM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
I even put forth a completely ignored compromise solution that would have solved
the problem and allowed extern(C) functions to be considered @safe by default:
On Friday, 22 May 2020 at 00:50:00 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 5/21/2020 2:44 PM, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote:
One concern here is that these responses are scattered across
different parts of a long discussion thread. So it probably
would be a good idea for the acceptance to be accompanied
On 5/21/2020 2:45 PM, bachmeier wrote:
On Thursday, 21 May 2020 at 20:48:18 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 5/21/2020 10:03 AM, bachmeier wrote:
Walter makes decisions based on his mood on a particular day
That's uncalled for.
Regional variation in English? Translation: You make your decisions
On 5/21/2020 2:44 PM, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote:
One concern here is that these responses are scattered across different parts of
a long discussion thread. So it probably would be a good idea for the
acceptance to be accompanied by an explanation of what the major objections were
to the
On Thursday, 21 May 2020 at 16:32:32 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Thursday, 21 May 2020 at 16:14:02 UTC, Seb wrote:
Why we can't we have a technical board where the community can
vote in experts and potentially companies could even buy a
seat for $$$ which would mean a lot more for them than
On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 01:46:09PM -0700, Walter Bright via
Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
[...]
> I expected flak from this decision. I'm prepared to take the flak
> because this is the right decision. I did not make it lightly.
This makes it sound like you think that those who disagree with you
On Thursday, 21 May 2020 at 20:46:09 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 5/21/2020 9:14 AM, Seb wrote:
Why we can't we have a technical board where the community can
vote in experts and potentially companies could even buy a
seat for $$$ which would mean a lot more for them than the
current very
On Thursday, 21 May 2020 at 21:41:53 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer
wrote:
The unfortunate end result of this change is that safety will
be gutted with all C functions being trusted by default
I'm really sorry, Walter, but I have to agree with Steve on this
point. This was the one aspect of the
On Thursday, 21 May 2020 at 20:48:18 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
On 5/21/2020 10:03 AM, bachmeier wrote:
Walter makes decisions based on his mood on a particular day
That's uncalled for.
Regional variation in English? Translation: You make your
decisions based on how you feel about the
On Thursday, 21 May 2020 at 20:59:08 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
Many replies to you, Steven:
https://digitalmars.com/d/archives/digitalmars/D/Discussion_Thread_DIP_1028--Make_safe_the_Default--Final_Review_336354.html
I did not ignore you. I just didn't agree.
One concern here is that these
On 5/21/20 4:59 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
On 5/21/2020 10:26 AM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
Agree. I will not be participating in the DIP process from now on. It
is a complete waste of time. Walter should just make the changes he
wants and not bother with the facade of discussion.
Many
On 5/21/2020 10:26 AM, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
Agree. I will not be participating in the DIP process from now on. It is a
complete waste of time. Walter should just make the changes he wants and not
bother with the facade of discussion.
Many replies to you, Steven:
On 5/21/2020 10:03 AM, bachmeier wrote:
Walter makes decisions based on his mood on a particular day
That's uncalled for.
On 5/21/2020 11:36 AM, H. S. Teoh wrote:
I'd even grant that Walter, being BFDL, can make whatever arbitrary
decisions he wants, but at the very least acknowledge the existence of
the rest of us. "Accepted without comment" amounts to denial that we
even exist, considering how much feedback was
On 5/21/2020 9:14 AM, Seb wrote:
On Thursday, 21 May 2020 at 13:51:34 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
DIP 1028, "Make @safe the Default", has been accepted without comment.
https://github.com/dlang/DIPs/blob/master/DIPs/accepted/DIP1028.md
"without comment" - even though there were a lot of
On Thu, May 21, 2020 at 05:49:27PM +, Paul Backus via
Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
[...]
> I think the real problem here is the lack of communication. As it
> stands, we have no way to tell whether feedback was considered or
> ignored, or what the ultimate rationale behind this decision
On Thursday, 21 May 2020 at 17:49:27 UTC, Paul Backus wrote:
On Thursday, 21 May 2020 at 17:03:49 UTC, bachmeier wrote:
The problem as I see it is someone making a decision on his
own DIP. That just doesn't make any sense to me, and I've
stated that numerous times. Walter has a tendency to
On Thursday, 21 May 2020 at 17:03:49 UTC, bachmeier wrote:
The problem as I see it is someone making a decision on his own
DIP. That just doesn't make any sense to me, and I've stated
that numerous times. Walter has a tendency to throw gas on the
fire by ignoring much of the feedback and not
On Thursday, 21 May 2020 at 13:51:34 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
DIP 1028, "Make @safe the Default", has been accepted without
comment.
https://github.com/dlang/DIPs/blob/master/DIPs/accepted/DIP1028.md
As others have mentioned, this really is a farce. I understand
that not everybody will be
On 5/21/20 12:14 PM, Seb wrote:
On Thursday, 21 May 2020 at 13:51:34 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
DIP 1028, "Make @safe the Default", has been accepted without comment.
https://github.com/dlang/DIPs/blob/master/DIPs/accepted/DIP1028.md
"without comment" - even though there were a lot of
On Thursday, 21 May 2020 at 16:48:22 UTC, SashaGreat wrote:
On Thursday, 21 May 2020 at 16:32:32 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Thursday, 21 May 2020 at 16:14:02 UTC, Seb wrote:
Why we can't we have a technical board where the community
can vote in experts and potentially companies could even
On Thursday, 21 May 2020 at 16:14:02 UTC, Seb wrote:
On Thursday, 21 May 2020 at 13:51:34 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
DIP 1028, "Make @safe the Default", has been accepted without
comment.
https://github.com/dlang/DIPs/blob/master/DIPs/accepted/DIP1028.md
"without comment" - even though there
On Thursday, 21 May 2020 at 16:32:32 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Thursday, 21 May 2020 at 16:14:02 UTC, Seb wrote:
Why we can't we have a technical board where the community can
vote in experts and potentially companies could even buy a
seat for $$$ which would mean a lot more for them than
On Thursday, 21 May 2020 at 16:14:02 UTC, Seb wrote:
Why we can't we have a technical board where the community can
vote in experts and potentially companies could even buy a seat
for $$$ which would mean a lot more for them than the current
very vague sponsorship options.
ditto, I think we
On Thursday, 21 May 2020 at 13:51:34 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
DIP 1028, "Make @safe the Default", has been accepted without
comment.
https://github.com/dlang/DIPs/blob/master/DIPs/accepted/DIP1028.md
"without comment" - even though there were a lot of unaddressed
problems :/
Great! So
On Thursday, 21 May 2020 at 13:51:34 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
DIP 1028, "Make @safe the Default", has been accepted without
comment.
https://github.com/dlang/DIPs/blob/master/DIPs/accepted/DIP1028.md
I guess they be more open to dips that fixes holes in the "safe
by default" feature then.
On 21.05.20 15:51, Mike Parker wrote:
DIP 1028, "Make @safe the Default", has been accepted without comment.
just another brick in the wall
40 matches
Mail list logo
