Adding a new design constraint to D

[forkit]

On Friday, 17 June 2022 at 01:09:29 UTC, Basile B. wrote:
>
> ..
> The way to bring changes is not anger, it's called DIP.

yes I agree.

btw. I cannot recall every gettng angry over this issue ;-)

frustrated yes, angry no.

In any case. I've made two decisions.

(1) Not to proceed with this idea
(2) To stop using D, completely.

Reasons for (1) are that the vast majority of D users do not 
compose problems using OO like decomposition. So it is almost 
impossible to find like minded people willing to co-author a DIP 
like this. Also, since most D users do not do OO decomposition, 
it would be difficult to find support for the DIP once introduced.
Also, Walter would certainly prevent it, regardless.

Reasons for (2). This comes back to Walter waking up one morning 
and putting ImportC into the langauge at his own volition, and 
nobody really challenging that.
That makes me nervous. It means anything could happen anytime in 
D, if Walter makes that decision. I felt really uncomfortable 
using D ever since I say the 'trivial' PR from Walter!

I'm moving on.

So you're welcome to let this thread die off.

Alternatively, I'm sure Mike is eager to find a reason to lock it 
- now he has one ;-)