Adding a new design constraint to D

[Paulo Pinto]

On Friday, 17 June 2022 at 11:10:39 UTC, Dukc wrote:
> On Friday, 17 June 2022 at 06:18:30 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:
>>
>> Where is the DIP for ImportC
>
> According to Walter in last DConf online ImportC is supposed to 
> be compiler-specific thing, not part of the language. Of course 
> this means it's description should not be in the spec. It 
> belongs to the dmd manual.
>
>> or @live?
>
> [here,](https://github.com/dlang/DIPs/blob/master/DIPs/accepted/DIP1021.md) well not quite but kind of. The attribute itself is not part of that DIP but at least it describes an important part of `@live`.
>
> But I get your point, that the language maintainers have not 
> always gone through the DIP process when adding new 
> functionality. IMO it should not be a requirement for them to 
> do so when there is no reason to, but it should be the standard 
> procedure when designing something major. I share your 
> viewpoint that Walter has sometimes cowboyed past the process 
> (or tried to) when it'd been better to write a DIP or at least 
> discuss the issue before acting. His track record is not all 
> bad though. The bottom type DIP Walter submitted was rejected, 
> but a revision of that by Dennis was later accepted.

In other language communities, compiler changes are also driven 
by DIPs like processes.

Anyway, you got my point.