How about "auto" parameters?

[Steven Schveighoffer]

On Fri, 03 Jun 2011 11:19:14 -0400, Matthew Ong <ongbp at yahoo.com> wrote:

> On 6/3/2011 11:47 AM, Mehrdad wrote:
>> == Quote from Jonathan M Davis (jmdavisProg at gmx.com)'s article
>
>>> understand templates to use D properly - especially when dealing
>> with Phobos -
>>> that doesn't help at all.
>>> I see no advantages with this idea and quite a few disadvantages.
>> This
>>> proposal adds absolutely nothing.
>>> - Jonathan M Davis
>>
>>
>> o__o way to bash the proposal, it actually convinced me lol...
>
>
>  >> proposal adds absolutely nothing.
> You will get this frequently. Especially if you identify with Java  
> development.

Please understand two important things:

1. We are open to proposals of new features, as long as you are open to  
having them rejected.  I have had several ideas that have been  
incorporated (array appending update, scoped const (inout) ) and have had  
10x that amount rejected.
2. Do not take offense to being bashed -- there are literally 2 or 3 new  
proposals for the language a week.  These come in two forms.  The first  
are what I'd call "preferences" or "I wish D did things just like X" where  
X can be substituted for Java or Python or whatever your favorite bikeshed  
is called.  These kinds of proposals rarely go anywhere, because D usually  
already supports the requested functionality, just with a different  
style.  These are (understandably) met with statements like the above,  
especially if the community has already discussed such features ad-nauseum.

The second form are proposals that solve a problem that D has.  When these  
come about, usually there is a lively discussion which talks about the  
merits of such a proposal weighted against the drawbacks.  Look for the  
recent discussion about casting for an example.  Note that usually the  
people who maintain the language are going to be resistant to change -- a  
frequently changing language can lead to a completely unstable or  
unimplementable one.  You need to really convince everyone that your idea  
is worth changing the language (and potentially breaking existing code).   
There are lots of subtle consequences to introducing changes.

Many times (and this was the case with your proposals), someone brings up  
an idea that has been discussed and rejected already.  It's sort of unfair  
to the person just joining the community to be rejected immediately --  
they weren't a part of the original discussion.  But it's also tiresome to  
continually argue the same things over and over with new people.  I think  
this is just the way things are, and will always be.

> http://www.digitalmars.com/d/
> Notice: We *welcome feedback about the D compiler or language*,
>
> Not so true. Or out right should warn people as:
>
> Notice: Take it the way how we like it here, we are Not Burger K*ng.
> Please see:
> d.D.learn
> AND MAKE sure you read this
> d.D.NoSuchUselessSuggestion
>
> What do you think D forum people, at least new people here are for warn.
> Add a bit of humor into that.
>
> I do see a pattern here. Just joined D forum less than 4 weeks ago.
> Got a week off to clear my head. I think now I understand why D is still
> such a small community in the forum.

Go into any community which has a decade of discussion and structure under  
its belt and say "I'm new here, I think we should change everything to be  
the way I like it," and see how far you get.  This is not a property of D,  
it's a property of a stable development process.  We resist change, but we  
are open to *new* ideas and creative solutions.  For me, I'd rather be  
bluntly told "this is never going to be accepted, forget about it" than  
waste time arguing something that has no chance of success.

Yes, we welcome feedback about the D compiler or language, but you should  
also welcome feedback as to why your ideas might not work.  Just because  
you are not successful in your suggestions is not because of some  
deep-seated hatred for your original language.

-Steve