Eliminate assert and lazy from D?

[Craig Black]

"bearophile" <bearophileHUGS at lycos.com> wrote in message 
news:hb17v3$1e4r$1 at digitalmars.com...
> Andrei Alexandrescu Wrote:
>
>> Usually you're
>> all for adding features (hey, you just brought up the switch again!
>> isn't that ironic?) and cleaning up bad parts of the language,
>
> Sorry, I'm not a computer scientist, and surely I am not a language 
> designer (especially for a C++-class language), so you may see some 
> contradictions in what I sometimes say :-)
>
> I have brought up the switch again because I was nervous, after spending 
> some time to find a bug caused by the current design of the switch.
>
> There are classes of bugs that aren't easy to avoid, but I think with a 
> less bug-prone switch I may avoid bugs like the one I have removed from my 
> code.
> One of the most basic part of the Zen of D is to help programmers to avoid 
> bugs, where possible.
>
> I hate the idea of having 3 different switches in the language (that's why 
> I was not happy to see the static switch, because a better redesign of the 
> *second* switch was in order). But the current situation of switch is not 
> good for D yet.
>
> Bye,
> bearophile

Since it seems there are fundamental changes already going into D 2.0, I 
agree with bearophile.  I don't like the syntax of switch, which is based on 
the old C switch syntax.  Yuck!  But I digress, this is not on topic.

-Craig