We are forking D

[Paolo Invernizzi]

On Wednesday, 10 January 2024 at 11:24:29 UTC, Guillaume Piolat 
wrote:
> On Wednesday, 10 January 2024 at 10:40:51 UTC, Paolo Invernizzi 
> wrote:
>> Let's come back to pragmatism:
>> - everyone thinks DIP1038e is far better than DIP1027
>
> This isn't strictly true.
>
> Some people like me don't care at all don't have time to read 
> DIP and arguments, and trust the core team to choose for them. 
> It's called having someone responsible for the design.
>
> I'm in the camp of people fed up hearing about string 
> interpolation for the last 3 months, and all the drama 
> surrounding it. I'd rather not have string interpolation than 
> just hearing about people complaining for months. Because this 
> is what happened and at this point I can very well live without 
> variables in quotes.
>
> That's from seeing the leadership fence off bad ideas since 
> years and years.
> A lot of the times, about the right decision was taken.
> It's painful seeing people becoming ever more demanding of 
> open-source projects.
>
> And I remember very well this community to be against 
> introduction of @nogc, of UDAs (there was massive backlash), of 
> -betterC, of memory-safety... including me.

What was meant obviously is: everyone who cares, had time to read 
DIP and arguments, and obviously trust the core team is on 
DIP1038e. If you don't care, well, that's fine.

I care, for example, because that would be an improvement in my 
company codebase.

But, again, the point under discussion is different, and Theo 
explained it well in his posts in this thread, don't focus 
yourself on the current specific case in string interpolation.

/O