switch()

[Manu]

On 18 February 2014 01:02, Kenji Hara <k.hara.pg at gmail.com> wrote:

> 2014-02-17 22:33 GMT+09:00 Manu <turkeyman at gmail.com>:
>
> On 17 February 2014 16:18, Andrei Alexandrescu <
>> SeeWebsiteForEmail at erdani.org> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2/16/14, 7:42 AM, Manu wrote:
>>>
>>>> So D offers great improvements to switch(), but there are a few small
>>>> things I wonder about.
>>>>
>>>
>>> TL;DR of my answer to this: at some point we must get used to the notion
>>> that minute syntax tweaks are always possible that make us feel we're
>>> making progress when instead we're just moving the rubble around.
>>>
>>
>> OT: Do you realise how harsh your posts often appear to people? I often
>> find I need to restrain myself when replying to your blunt dismissals of
>> peoples opinions/suggestions.
>>
>> So, you admit that this is a disaster site, but are reluctant to consider
>> what good may come of it?
>> I'm not suggesting to move the rubble around a bit, I'm suggesting a
>> missed opportunity to build something new and useful from the rubble.
>>
>
> I completely agree with Andrei. We should continue to keep that D is the
> successor of the most used system languages - C and C++. it's a *huge*
> advantage against other modern languages.
>

I agree, to an extent. That's why I say if it is to be improved, I guess it
needs a new name.
foreach eliminated almost all instances of for. I don't think anyone's
upset about that.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puremagic.com/pipermail/digitalmars-d/attachments/20140218/7061a84e/attachment-0001.html>