> On 28.07.2016, at 20:20, Karl Wagner <[email protected]> wrote: > > +1. There have been lots of accepted proposals which I argued against, but > community-driven evolution means we have to compromise. This would imply, that if a decision is made, which in a later and changed context proves to be a bad one, would be irreversible? Better turn half way than to err in continuing. Or, one decides to go diving, but arriving at the location, notice that the water is full of sharks? Still continue?
> > In Plato's Crito, Socrates refuses to flee Athens after being sentenced to > death. He entered in to an agreement with the state to participate in the > process and respect its judgements, and reasons that to violate the rules of > the system because he believes the outcome unjust would be a greater > injustice. > > Just mentioning it; it's always been a fascinating story to me. Thanks, interesting. Long ago I’ve read a bit in Plato - The Republic but was back then to hyper active to concentrate.. > > Karl > > Sent from my new Email > <https://itunes.apple.com/app/apple-store/id922793622?pt=814382&mt=8&ct=my_new_email> > TedvG > >> On Jul 28, 2016 at 7:33 PM, <Austin Zheng via swift-evolution >> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >> >> >>> On Jul 28, 2016, at 10:19 AM, Ted F.A. van Gaalen via swift-evolution >>> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: >>> >>> -= Maybe it’s not too late =- >>> For the moment the classical for ;; could simply >>> remain activated (Yes) in 3.0. because: >> >> I don't understand why you keep on complaining about this. >> >> For the record, I too think getting rid of the C-style for loop was a >> mistake, and there are a number of other proposals whose outcomes are not >> ones I would have personally preferred. >> >> However, >> >> 1. There is a well-defined process through which all changes to the Swift >> language must go, laid out in the swift-evolution repository's documentation >> from the first day Swift became an open-source project. >> 2. That process includes feedback and review from both the community and the >> Swift core engineers, and often multiple rounds of discussion. >> 3. The process doesn't work if we disregard its outcomes simply because we >> don't like them, or if we allow interminable chains of back-and-forth >> proposals because people on one side of issue X simply cannot accept a >> particular decision. >> >> The technical aspects of the C-style for loop and its proposed replacements >> have already been discussed ad nauseam on this list and in other places, so >> I won't touch on them. >> >> Best regards, >> Austin >> >>> >>> - It doesn’t conflict at all with all other language elements, >> >> _______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list >> [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution >> <https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution>
_______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list [email protected] https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
