DIP1028 - Rationale for accepting as is

[Atila Neves]

On Friday, 22 May 2020 at 18:17:29 UTC, ag0aep6g wrote:
> On 22.05.20 19:54, Atila Neves wrote:

>> We care. Annotations become explicit. Do I think this is 
>> ideal? No.
>
> "Annotations become explicit." - What now? I probably 
> misunderstand that sentence, but DIP 1028 does not require 
> explicit annotations. That's why everyone is upset.

Sorry, I didn't express myself well. I meant that the user can 
still mark functions as @system, they just have to do it 
explicitly.