Dlist and dip1000 challenge

Nicholas Wilson iamthewilsonator at hotmail.com
Wed Oct 24 05:48:25 UTC 2018


On Wednesday, 24 October 2018 at 01:23:00 UTC, Walter Bright 
wrote:
> On 10/23/2018 3:22 PM, Brad Roberts wrote:
>> On 10/23/2018 3:10 PM, Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d wrote:
>>>
>>> My improvements to DIP1000 are completely dead in the water 
>>> due to lack of interest. It's impossible to make Phobos 
>>> DIP1000 compatible if nobody is willing to approve the 
>>> improvements.
>>>
>>> https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/8504
>> 
>> Every time you say this I want to drive over and bonk you up 
>> side the head.  You keep making this statement and it's almost 
>> entirely false. The onus has been on you to produce specs and 
>> docs for this major change to the language semantics.  You 
>> inevitably point to the one issue in bugzilla, which is then 
>> pointed out to be sketchy and incomplete and the topic fades 
>> off into history, again.
>
> No, it has not been pointed out so. There was one request for 
> clarification, which I responded to. 
> https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=19097#c5
>
> There's not been a single comment on the PR implementation 
> itself.

Yes, can you guess why?

>> If you want this to make forward progress, and I think it's 
>> fairly agreed that it needs to, you really need to accept that 
>> it's past time to do the documentation work.
>
> The documentation is there for all to read.

FFS! Bugzilla in NOT documentation!

> There's no consistent practice for the documentation must be 
> pulled before the implementation or vice versa.

You have _three_ PRs outstanding lacking documentation, which _I_
have documented _for you_, all you need do is verify that what I 
think you have have done in those PRs and we can move forward.

Until you do that nobody is going to review your PRs.

You're already caused at least two people to "reconsider their 
involvement" over the way you have handled dip1008, if you 
continue your arrogance/ignorance/stubbornness (and I'm genuinely 
not sure which) that number is only going to rise.

Shachar was right, D does have lethal structural problems just 
waiting to start crumbling.

I even agree with the change you want to make, but I don't 
understand it because there's no fucking documentation!

/rant



More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list