Bottom Type--Type Theory

[rikki cattermole]

On 17/01/2019 11:21 PM, H. S. Teoh wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 05:45:13PM -0800, Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> [...]
>> My interest in a bottom type comes from wanting a sounder mathematical
>> basis for types in D, but sadly nobody else seems interested, and this
>> DIP is pretty much DOA.
> 
> Actually, I think most of the negative reactions come not from the
> technical problems of the DIP itself, but from the (perceived or
> otherwise) way it was handled, such as how it got to final review stage
> when it clearly needs more work. It may have sparked less outrage had it
> stayed in draft stage until the technical problems were ironed out.

As someone who will be voting no because I do not feel the feedback has 
been applied in the DIP, this is correct. While I may agree that getting 
this passed is a good thing, I do not feel the lack of response is.