Clojure and Pull Request Controversy

[welkam]

On Thursday, 29 November 2018 at 10:14:37 UTC, Chris wrote:
>
> You do realize that autodecode is an old flaw that has to go 
> sooner or later. It negatively affects string handling 
> performance, is not even correct and is a deal breaker in a 
> world where string handling is omnipresent.

Its a flaw but I wouldn't call it a deal breaker. If you want 
performance you will pay attention to details and you will see 
where autodecode happens and you can fix that.

Now Walter has asked you twice what are you proposing to do about 
autodecode that doesnt SILENTLY break existing code. Walter is a 
guy that doesnt like to be verbose and tries to express himself 
with as few words as possible. If we expand his one sentence we 
would get something like this.

I agree with you that autodecode is a problem and its a feature 
that appeared to be good on idea level. Now that its clear that 
it is a problem we thought hard on possible solutions to this 
problem and we didnt found satisfactory solution. Its possible 
that our limited brains could not have thought all possibilities 
and you might have a key to solving this problem once and for all 
so with that hope I ask you what are you proposing?

And to this you respond with

> And reasonable paths to fix it have been proposed.

What path? When proposed? Where can I read about them? And of 
those paths which one do you prefer? If you wrote one more vague 
statement like this a cute animal will die. Like this one 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=18-xvIjH8T4&t=20

> I'd suggest something like the "D labs" for it where you can 
> test all those great new ideas and features for a minimum of 
> one year.

You mean something like DIP? As a person who is so critical of 
everything you seem to know remarkably low on how D sausage is 
made. That came out wrong...