Formal review of DIP1002

[Dicebot via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On Thursday, 17 November 2016 at 15:26:21 UTC, John Colvin wrote:
> Regardless of the outcome, I just want to commend whoever wrote 
> the rejection text* on doing such a clear and comprehensive 
> job. I'm sure it must be disappointing for a DIP author to have 
> it rejected, but detailed, constructive criticism like this 
> would - for me at least - make the experience worthwhile and 
> encourage further contributions of higher quality.
>
> * I see dicebot committed, but I'm presuming Walter &| Andrei 
> had a lot of input and I think i detect recent exposure to the 
> academic review process...

The text was sent to me by Andrei, though I presume Walter did 
take part in making the decision :)

Hopefully such high quality and detailed feedback will provide a 
much more clear picture about expectations from DIP content and 
overall chances for various kinds of proposals to be approved.