why a part of D community do not want go to D2 ?

[Andrei Alexandrescu]

On 11/8/10 12:48 PM, bearophile wrote:
> Andrei:
>
>> A longer term perception problem is that some might think the
>> _design_ of such features has unsolvable issues,
>
> That's my fear (so it's problem, even if it's just a perceived
> imaginary problem). But I am not in a rush, so I am not going away.
>
>
>> I know of no major design flaws,
>
> Uhm... For example the whole implementation of nonnullables in D2 is
> already becoming a big design flaw.

I think we have different definitions of what a design flaw is. C++
export was a design flaw. PHP also has several design flaws. The fact
that you can't implement non-nullable references in e.g. C++ or Java is
not a design flaw in those respective languages.

Generally I think the case of non-null references is overstated. It
doesn't deserve that much agitation. It's being mentioned as a life or
death matter in spite of the simple evidence that many mainstream
languages are doing well without it, and without a landslide popular
vote for adding it. (And it's not a flaw in their design that they don't
make non-null references implementable.)

> Library-based nonullables will be awful, quite worse than the
> Rebindable hack.

How did you reach that conclusion?


Andrei