DIP 1021--Argument Ownership and Function Calls--Final Review
timon.gehr at gmx.ch
Mon Sep 16 19:15:35 UTC 2019
On 16.09.19 18:34, Olivier FAURE wrote:
> On Monday, 16 September 2019 at 15:33:31 UTC, 12345swordy wrote:
> I'm going to be blunt, moreso than usual: this is a tense discussion
> about a contentious subject, and right now you're adding nothing of
> value to it.
> Yes, DRY is a good principle in software development, in general. It
> doesn't really apply to a debate process, which doesn't have the same
> constraints as a body of code or documentation.
> More importantly, I've already gone on at length about why Rust isn't
> directly comparable to D, and why this proposal in particular is very
> different from Rust's memory model, and as such needs a deeper analysis
> than "we'll do it like Rust".
> So I think as a matter of courtesy, you should probably read the
> arguments that have already been made on the subject before lecturing
> other people about not repeating things.
> Sorry, I realize I'm being hostile. But we've been debating this for
> weeks, and we really don't need another surface level back-and-forth
> like you're doing.
I don't think there's any need to be sorry. Your reaction is appropriate.
More information about the Digitalmars-d