named arguments, string interpolation, please stop.

[Walter Bright]

On 1/11/2024 5:11 PM, zjh wrote:
> A very simple example is a user, like me, who really wants a `C++ class level 
> private`. This' private 'can be achieved by adding a `keyword`, you only need to 
> add one keyword, and then implement the corresponding function. Then, you get a 
> bunch of `potential C++ users`. But `D` team refuse this `pr` , the user leaves. 
> Originally, it could bring a bunch of its friends to enter D. In the end, D 
> loses all and has nothing. There is `no function`, There are `no D users`.

What is the criteria for if a feature should be merged or not? I cannot think of 
one where somebody isn't going to be unhappy about the result.

For example, there are D users who want the GC removed from the language, and 
another group that want D focused on the GC. We have attempted to embrace both 
sets of users with BetterC, but there are people still unhappy with that.

It reminds me of a story my dad told me. He talked to the mayor of the small 
town he lived in, and asked the mayor "what's your biggest problem in managing 
the town?" The mayor replied "there are two groups of people - those who like 
dogs, and those who do not. They are each roughly half of the population. There 
is no reconciliation between those two groups. It's constant friction."