Idea #1 on integrating RC with GC

[Andrei Alexandrescu]

On 2/11/14, 1:42 AM, "Ola Fosheim Grøstad" 
<ola.fosheim.grostad+dlang at gmail.com>" wrote:
> On Tuesday, 11 February 2014 at 02:15:37 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>> On 2/10/14, 6:24 AM, "Ola Fosheim Grøstad"
>> <ola.fosheim.grostad+dlang at gmail.com>" wrote:
>>> No, I don't think it is only a matter of resources. For instance, if I
>>> had the time
>>
>> Oh, the unbelievable irony.
>
> Not really. If you have too many outstanding issues it means you have
> added to many features. It means you failed to do feature freeze at an
> earlier stage.
>
> It could also mean that you don't give priority to mentoring. Sometimes
> it is better to let your best people do mentoring and help bringing
> "master level students" up to speed.
>
> People are not loyal to a project. People are loyal to other people. If
> a mentor invests time in you, you will feel a social debt. This is the
> principle of gifting.
>
> You can create a strategy for mentoring. One obvious one is to focus on
> making the code base suitable for academia. Then you can offer
> supervision of master students. Academics love to have good external
> supervisors taking some load off their backs. That means lowering the
> requirements for compilation speed in order to get in some high level
> optimization and other features that you cannot otherwise have.
>
> You can give priority to getting in support for more social bonding
> between developers, like give priority to an IDE that supports CSCW
> style collaboration (seeing the code view of others). With Skype that
> could make pair programming (from XP) possible.
>
> There are many options.

I confess I don't understand all of this (not sure whether the 
pointed-out irony has been acknowledged, not sure even whether it's 
subtle trolling), but upon reading it a couple of times I get the sense 
it's he exact management gobbledygook I'd like to protect this community 
from.


Andrei