Should we remove int[$] before 2.067?

[Meta via Digitalmars-d]

On Friday, 30 January 2015 at 14:47:22 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu 
wrote:
> As discussed in this forum, Kenji has authored 
> https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dmd/pull/3615 which 
> has been recently merged.
>
> By this I am proposing we revert that decision, and quickly - 
> before 2.067 is released lest we'll need to support it forever. 
> Here's why.
>
> One simple litmus test for a new language feature is "it can't 
> be done within the current language". That's a good yardstick; 
> coupled with the importance of the task, it forms a compelling 
> reason for adding the feature. There's nuance to that, e.g. it 
> can be done but it's onerously difficult; or the feature is so 
> frequently needed, dedicated language is warranted.
>
> The recent int[$] feature seems to fail that test. That 
> feature, and in fact more, can be done trivially with library 
> code:
>
> http://dpaste.dzfl.pl/f49a97e35974.
>
> In my opinion these particular features are not frequent enough 
> to warrant dedicated syntax.

I'm somewhat neutral on [$], although I think it is useful. I 
like the partial type deduction feature and think we should keep 
that. It makes a lot of array declarations more concise, and 
subjectively, I think it feels like a natural extension of what D 
already does with auto.

I think if you showed someone auto declarations and then showed 
them something like auto[] arr = [...], their likely reaction 
would be "well of course that works". Although maybe I'm too 
familiar with D at this point and that's not the case at all.


> Furthermore, one other unpleasant aftermath of int[$] is that 
> new syntax begets more new syntax. The proverbial ink was not 
> yet dry on the #3615 merge when a new, new syntax was proposed 
> in this forum, this time for statically-allocated 
> statically-sized arrays. Far as I can tell the main argument is 
> "you have to write longer code" without it.

If you're talking about Bearophile's proposed [1, 2]s syntax, 
he's been pushing that for a long time, possibly before [$].