Property discussion wrap-up

[Andrei Alexandrescu]

On 1/28/13 11:21 AM, deadalnix wrote:
> On Monday, 28 January 2013 at 15:44:28 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>>> Phobos is kind of fucked up in this regard.
>>
>> I understand how you feel though you probably are overstating it. No
>> language can please everyone, and nobody will be pleased by all
>> aspects of a language.
>>
>
> Yes that is probably overstated. But please consider that this state of
> thing in phobos comes from the lax property enforcement in the first
> place, which mitigate greatly your argument about phobos codebase.

I don't see how that computes. We started from lax rules. Then we had 
somewhat stronger rules, and I personally saw no benefit. I fail to see 
how it follows that even stronger rules would help there.

Andrei