Source changes should include date of change

[Josphe Brigmo]

On Sunday, 9 September 2018 at 02:48:40 UTC, Neia Neutuladh wrote:
> On Sunday, 9 September 2018 at 01:27:06 UTC, Josphe Brigmo 
> wrote:
>> How hard would it be to automate dating for dmd source so that 
>> everything is consistent in a way that makes sense?
>
> Perhaps you could find out by trying to implement such a 
> system? That's what I usually do.
>
> You haven't described the problems you want to address in any 
> detail, so you're the only one who knows what would make sense. 
> That means you're the only person who could even hope to 
> estimate the difficulty. Plus it would be a fair bit of work 
> that nobody else seems that interested in, so unless you're 
> offering to pay, you're the only one motivated to do the work.
>
> But perhaps, if you presented your results, they would be 
> interesting enough for others to adopt.

Yes, but the fact is they would not appreciate my work because 
they do not appreciate it now. You might appreciate it but the 
fact is, people that bitch and complain about someone saying they 
have a problem with something and that "Do it my way attitude" 
are people who don't appreciate other peoples work, they only use 
it to further their own self.

So, since I don't have to implement it, and because it is not a 
huge problem, I won't. Screw the assholes who try to shut down 
people and progress just because they are assholes(and who have 
no good reasons). It's one thing to debate a topic to find the 
best solution and it's another to try to shut it down based on an 
irrelevant argument.

You know, not everything is complex:

What is proposed here does not change the source any one bit. It 
only adds to it. It is basically inheritance(or a product). It 
doesn't distort the code(e.g., map it to a random alphabet) nor 
does it introduce any bugs.

All it can do is add bloat. That is it!

So, what they are bitching about, really, is they don't want 
bloat. But they can't see that because they are only conformist 
and they don't want anything to interfere with them conforming.

But see, the problem with bloat is not necessary a problem. It is 
only a problem if the bloat is not useful. E.g., a class 
inheriting another class is adding bloat, so to speak.

So, the issue should be how much bloat, how to control the bloat, 
and how to make the bloat useful...

But guess what? No relevant discussion on these meaningful issues 
of the problem(the ones that, if they could be solved would solve 
the problem for everyone within reason) because they shut down 
the argument with there authoritative and mindless drivel.

So, no, I will not help out, it's obviously no one wants help. I 
do have to do a risk analysis assessment because it does cost me 
my time. What I see is that I won't invest it because I won't 
invest in people with such attitudes which further helps them 
along and only generally strengthens their attitudes(because it 
must be working, right?).

I will not play the shit slinging game. You or others will think 
I am slinging shit because I don't conform, but it's precisely 
why I am not slinging shit, because I am not conforming to the 
shit slingers. Of course, that assumes I am not a shit linger but 
it does prove that only one side slings shit. I let the 
historical record be my proof of who slings shit. They should be 
easy to spot because they have the smelly hands.

A question I propose to you is that if a shit slinger slings shit 
at someone and that person throws the shit back at the original 
shit slinger, are they too a shit slinger? If so, are they 
equally culpable?