DIP 1009 (Add Expression-Based Contract Syntax) Accepted

[Zach Tollen]

On Saturday, 7 April 2018 at 16:10:41 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
> What's the philosophy around accepted DIPs containing multiple 
> suggestions/alternatives. For example, this DIP mentions three 
> alternatives for the "out" syntax [1], it's not crystal clear 
> which one was actually accepted.

I think the philosophy is just that it's good to record the 
thought process which led in the final suggestion. The DIP does 
recommend syntax option 3 for "out" contracts, which is also the 
only one described in the grammar. This could be clearer, but now 
I want to change the language spec, which obviously matters a 
whole lot more, now that the DIP has been accepted.