D's greatest mistakes

[Steven Schveighoffer]

On Tue, 30 Nov 2010 10:36:53 -0500, Andrei Alexandrescu  
<SeeWebsiteForEmail at erdani.org> wrote:

> I agree that the problem is difficult but disagree with the angle. This  
> is not the challenge, and it is not only mine to take. To the extent  
> we're interested in making D a successful language, we're all on the  
> same boat, so the challenge belongs to us all.
>
> Adding a new type constructor to the language or generally a new feature  
> is always possible, but has a high cost. Half of the community throws  
> their hand in the air with each new feature, and the other half throws  
> them in the air for each feature that could have been. The key is to  
> navigate such that as many good designs are expressible as easily as  
> possible.
>
> The real challenge is to solve the problem within the global set of  
> constraints we have, not to prove that a language feature would solve  
> it. I know a language feature would take care of the issue, the same way  
> money would take care of buying a nice house. The challenge is to have a  
> nice house when money _is_ limited.

IMO opinion, the cost of modifying the language so that a library solution  
that half-solves the problem is possible, in order to create a template  
that handles all sorts of odd cases is far greater than a new keyword that  
would also enable things like tail-const ranges.

To go with your analogy, we own the bank (compiler), we can print our own  
money...

-Steve