DIP27 available for destruction

[deadalnix]

On Wednesday, 27 February 2013 at 15:57:12 UTC, Andrej Mitrovic 
wrote:
> On 2/27/13, Timon Gehr <timon.gehr at gmx.ch> wrote:
>> I think the only technical problem of DIP27 outside the 
>> optional
>> parentheses part is that it does not specify what 
>> is(T==function) will do.
>
> The only problem? How about breaking every single piece of code 
> ever
> written in D?
>
> It seems to me like people assume we can easily force people to
> rewrite everything. It ain't gonna happen. This DIP was DOA 
> from the
> start.

That is fallacy. PHP did massive breaking changes from 5 to 5 and 
still managed the change. And believe me, you'll find *WAY* more 
code written in PHP than in D even at the time.

Breaking are not a problem in themselves and this reaction tells 
us more about our inability to do the most basic release 
management than anything else.

On a more personal level, every single version of dmd break my 
code, so I'm kind of fed up when people don't want to fix actual 
broken stuff to not break code. D break code all the time, that 
is a fact already. Many breakage don't even have a good reason to 
exists (alias this syntax, I'm looking at you, but you are not 
the only one).