Why isn't dip1000 fully implemented yet?

[Daniel N]

On Thursday, 22 November 2018 at 08:44:10 UTC, Per Nordlöw wrote:
> On Tuesday, 20 November 2018 at 02:43:11 UTC, 12345swordy wrote:
>> The work has been done! Just review it and merge it! I don't 
>> what to do, other then to beg here.
>
> People are different and have different goals of their 
> development with D. In my experience, the only productive way 
> forward is to encourage, reward and help out. And that not only 
> with the things you are interested in. Walter has recently been 
> swamped and very productive with porting the backend to DMD 
> which is a great step forward that's gonna reduce many bugs in 
> the long run. Walter likes bugzilla. If you add things there 
> and send him the ref he will sooner or later do something about 
> it. He has fixed bugs regarding dip1000 I have filed there. If 
> you start asking people what they need help with, the chance of 
> DIP-1000 getting in is gonna increase.
>
> Ask not what D can do for you, but
> What You can do for D.
>
> /Per

I believe the real issue is that...
https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/8504
... has not been merged.

If Walters fix is approved the spec can be merged directly 
afterwards.

The first parameter, like it or not, has special status in many 
situations, ex:
* implicit this
* properties
* chaining UFCS

Now Walter wants to add a 4th item to this list, someone either 
needs to approve it or come up with a better idea, otherwise we 
won't get anywhere, I for one would happily approve it but I 
obviously don't have the authority to do so.

If an entirely different solution is chosen, then this spec pull 
would document something which never even existed, that's why 
it's key to pull 8504 first imho, as then the semantics is 
cemented.