It makes me sick!

[FoxyBrown via Digitalmars-d-learn]

On Friday, 28 July 2017 at 01:10:03 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
> On Friday, 28 July 2017 at 00:28:52 UTC, FoxyBrown wrote:
>
>> You are not being very logical.
>>
>> The zip file as N files in it. No matter what those files are, 
>> it should be a closed system. That is, if I insert or add(not 
>> replace) M file to the directory structure it should not break 
>> D, period!
>
> That's *not* what happened here. Jonathan explained it quite 
> well. std.datetime was refactored into a package, its contents 
> split into new modules. When you import a module foo, dmd looks 
> for:
>
> 1. foo.di
> 2. foo.d
> 3. foo/package.d
>
> When it finds one, it stops looking. It's not an error for all 
> three to exist. Your error came because it found 
> std/datetime.d, but you linked to a library that included 
> symbols for std/datatetime/package.d. It's not the compiler's 
> responsibility to error in that case. It's your responsibility 
> to properly install.
>
>>
>> Why? Because NO file in the zip should be referencing any file 
>> not in the zip unless it is designed to behave that way(e.g., 
>> an external lib or whatever).
>>
>> If an old external program is referencing a file in dmd2 that 
>> isn't in the new zip it should err.
>>
>> Why? Because suppose you have an old program that references 
>> some old file in dmd2 dir and you upgrade dmd2 by extracting 
>> the zip. The program MAY still work and use broke 
>> functionality that will go undetected but be harmful.
>>
>> Why? Because dmd.exe is reference a file it shouldn't and it 
>> should know it shouldn't yet it does so anyways. It really has 
>> nothing to do with the file being in the dir but that dmd is 
>> being stupid because no one bothered to sanity checks because 
>> they are too lazy/think it's irrelevant because it doesn't 
>> effect them.
>
> That's unreasonable.
>
>>
>> I should be able to put any extra files anywhere in the dmd2 
>> dir structure and it should NOT break dmd.
>
> There are numerous applications out there that can break if you 
> simply overwrite a directory with a newer version of the app. 
> DMD is not alone with this. You should always delete the 
> directory first. It's precisely why the compiler does so.

So, that proves nothing. You are simply ok with wasting the end 
users time... you should grow up and take responsibility for what 
you release.

Your logic is not sound mathematically unless you think it's ok 
to waste end users time:

There is 1 programmer, you and N end users of your app. Ok? got 
that? Very simple mathematics.

Now, suppose you decide it is not worth your 10 mins to fix a 
problem or add sanity checks or robustness to your program and it 
effects 1% of the users of your app(we'll use a low percentage 
just to give you a fighting chance, which you don't deserve but 
we'll allow it).

Now, suppose that wastes only 10 mins of the end users 
time(again, we'll low ball the number because usually it is much 
greater since the end user is not familiar with out the program 
works like the creator of that program is).

This means that 10*0.01*N minutes are wasted overall of the human 
race because you didn't want to spend 10 minutes to fix a program.

If 10000 users use your app, that is 1000 minutes wasted ~= 17 
hours.

And that is a low estimate. So, just because you want to save 10 
minutes you've wasted 17 hours of human life... what an 
investment!

That is your mentality. You should run for US President! Your 
mentality fits right in with how the US handles it's money.

Remember how much of your own life has been wasted on fixing 
other peoples mess and maybe you might realize how bad it is... 
probably not though, maybe when your on your death bed you might 
get a spark of sanity... but then it will be too late and 
pointless.