DIP54 : revamp of Phobos tuple types

[H. S. Teoh]

On Mon, Dec 23, 2013 at 04:30:14PM -0800, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> On 12/23/13 5:41 AM, Maxim Fomin wrote:
> >Personally I am upset when I get some weird Phobos structure which
> >simulates language feature, rathen then having feature in the
> >language in first place.
> 
> It's a fine line to thread.

<grammarnazi> *tread. </grammarnazi>


> Erring on either side is easy and with bad consequences.
[...]

Personally, I'm for simplifying the core language and moving
non-essentials out to the standard library -- *provided* that said
standard library feature (1) doesn't suffer from overly ugly syntax due
to not being part of the language proper, and (2) isn't defective in
functionality in some way that a built-in wouldn't be.

Building too many things into the language is bad because it makes the
language (1) more complex than it needs to be, (2) harder to learn as a
result, and (3) require way too much effort to implement (or implement
*correctly*)(*cough*C++*cough*) -- you end up with "language is defined
by quirky compiler behaviour" rather than "language follows spec".


T

-- 
I think the conspiracy theorists are out to get us...