WTF did happen with struct constructor and ref in 2.061 ?

[Nick Sabalausky]

On Sun, 6 Jan 2013 00:58:11 -0500
Nick Sabalausky <SeeWebsiteToContactMe at semitwist.com> wrote:

> On Sun, 06 Jan 2013 00:45:24 -0500
> Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail at erdani.org> wrote:
> 
> > On 1/6/13 12:01 AM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
> > > On Thu, 03 Jan 2013 23:32:45 -0500
> > > Andrei Alexandrescu<SeeWebsiteForEmail at erdani.org>  wrote:
> > >
> > >> On 1/3/13 11:26 PM, Rob T wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> I like the idea of the e-book but we need an up-to-date copy and
> > >>> it should be available free of charge. If the D community needs
> > >>> funding, a method of making donations is a much better and more
> > >>> acceptable route to take.
> > >>
> > >> This is a misunderstanding and I confess I'm mildly miffed by it.
> > >> The e-book is generated from the online documentation. $0.99 is
> > >> the smallest price Amazon would allow any self-publication to be
> > >> on their site.
> > >
> > > It's an ebook version of the content on dlang.org, right? That
> > > should be free. If Amazon won't allow it to be free then it
> > > shouldn't be on Amazon. End of story.
> > 
> > Walter and I discussed this matter for a while and reached a
> > different conclusion. Amazon has good distribution which we found
> > worthwhile.
> 
> Amazon's reach is irrelevant given the bigger issue.
> 
> > The content is the same as the one freely available on
> > the website,
> 
> Which is exactly why it has no business existing in a paid
> electronic form.
> 
> > and we're not sketchy about it.
> 
> I'm tempted argue that it's _inherently_ sketchy, HOWEVER that's
> irrelevant anyway as, sketchy or not, it still creates an appearance
> of impropriety, which is bad enough for us.
> 

I'll put it another way: We've had public perception troubles in the
past. D1's competing std libs. Claims of not being OSS. We should know
by now not to do things that invite the wrong public perception.

Last thing we need is for a bunch of slashdotters or some such to notice
"Hey, wait a minute, these D guys are trying to sell copies of their own
website! WTF?!" If that got started, do you really think they're
going to stick around long enough to listen to our explanation of "Why
it's not as bad as it looks"?

Someone wants to read a website/pdf/ebook/whatever of the site on their
Kindle, then fine, we can provide our *free* copies and then people can
do as they please with them. Problem solved, there's nothing left to
argue.

(FWIW, a printed/bound hardcopy would be a different matter as there are
printing and material costs involved. But I'm not saying that would be a
good idea for something like this which needs to stay up-to-date,
of course.)