Should we remove int[$] before 2.067?

[eles via Digitalmars-d]

On Friday, 30 January 2015 at 18:08:15 UTC, Gary Willoughby wrote:
> On Friday, 30 January 2015 at 14:47:22 UT

> We don't want the situation of C++ where people only use 80% of 
> it's features and that 80% is different for everyone. I've 
> recently been writing some Go code and it's become clear to me 
> just how big of a language D really is.

You miss one point here. C++  is not despised for being complete, 
but for being ugly. Is not features in it that are too many, but 
the quirks.

Add more quirks to D instead of a lean syntax. This way you will 
end with C++.

You guys should watch again The last thing D needs. Library 
syntax shows 'it can be done' but *as a quirk*

Frankly, you can already do *everything* just by typing 'asm', 
isn't? You really want to stay there?

Everytime I follow the process managemnt and decision in D, it 
looks to me like IndburIII-esque:

'To him, a stilted geometric love of arrangement was "system," an 
indefatigable and feverish interest in the pettiest facets of 
day-to-day bureaucracy was "industry," indecision when right was 
"caution," and blind stubbornness when wrong, "determination."'

It is one thing to thrieve for caution and determination. But 
another thing to get those in the right way.

Right now, guys, you are going on the wrong road. Being 
conservative when wrong and revolutionary when wrong too.

Certainly, you end up by being both conservative and 
revolutionary. But, neither when it is needed.

I really support the syntax. Because makes one quirk less.