Generality creep

[Andrei Alexandrescu]

On 3/30/19 10:08 PM, Nicholas Wilson wrote:
>> One monumental piece of work would be DIP 1021 "Define the semantics 
>> of shared". Then people who build with -dip1021 know what to do and 
>> what to expect. Now that would patch one of the bigger holes mentioned 
>> in the other post.
> 
> Its in the vision section for the dconf AGM as:
> shared ( and @safe and shared)

The necessity to work on shared was also present in the January 2015 
vision document (https://wiki.dlang.org/Vision/2015H1): "Nail down 
fuzzily-defined areas of the language (e.g. shared semantics, @property)."

Writing it down doesn't get it done.

Defining shared properly would take a team with a programming languages 
expert, a threading expert, and an application expert. (Some roles may 
be realized within the same person.) I know people within our community 
with the required expertise. But I don't know any who'd also have the 
time to embark on this.

I got burned out on writing vision documents (Walter was never a fan so 
I did them all) because it was difficult to figure their impact. 
Contributors asked for a vision document. So we started one. Then 
contributors continued doing what they were doing.