Contradictory justification for status quo

[Zach the Mystic via Digitalmars-d]

On Friday, 27 February 2015 at 01:33:58 UTC, Jonathan M Davis 
wrote:
> Well, I suspect that each case would have to be examined 
> individually to
> decide upon the best action, but I think that what it comes 
> down to is the
> same problem that we have with getting anything done around 
> here - someone
> has to do it.

This isn't true at all. Things need to be approved first, then 
implemented.

> With language changes, it's often the same. Someone needs to 
> come up with a
> reasonable solution and then create a PR for it.  They then 
> have a much
> stronger position to argue from, and it may get in and settle 
> the issue.

I sometimes feel so bad for Kenji, who has come up with several 
reasonable solutions for longstanding problems, *and* implemented 
them, only to have them be frozen for *years* by indecision at 
the top. I'll never believe your side until this changes. You can 
see exactly how D works by looking at how Kenji spends his time. 
For a while he's only been fixing ICEs and other little bugs 
which he knows for certain will be accepted. I'm not saying any 
of these top level decisions are easy, but I don't believe you 
for a second, at least when it comes to the language itself. 
Phobos may be different.