http://wiki.dlang.org/DIP25

[via Digitalmars-d]

On Wednesday, 31 December 2014 at 03:25:24 UTC, Manu via 
Digitalmars-d wrote:
>> On the other hand, power just because we can add it is not 
>> always a good
>> thing. C macros are very powerful, but experience has shown it 
>> is the wrong
>> kind of power. Also, programmers do not really want a complex 
>> annotation
>> system. They want to just write code in the most obvious 
>> manner and have it
>> work correctly. Having a powerful (but complex) system is not 
>> very
>> attractive.
>
> His point is similar to my other point elsewhere though. I 
> don't think
> he's talking about 'power' in the sense you describe, what he's 
> really
> talking about is consistency or uniformity. His original scope
> proposal wasn't 'powerful' (even though it was effectively more
> powerful), it was holistic, and without the edges that seem to 
> have
> been introduced to try and 'contain the concept into a smaller 
> space',
> if that makes sense.
>
> In this particular case, I think practical 'complexity' is being
> expressed in the form of awkward edge cases, and the reason that
> happened I suspect, is precisely what Andrei asked me to do; 
> talk
> about the specific problem case, not the general problem that's
> recurring in numerous problem cases.
> I feel like the current proposals are to effectively add yet 
> more
> edges to address specific cases, rather than removing the edges 
> that
> are already present causing the problems in the first place.
> Address the problem, don't add layers of patches to round off 
> rough edges.

Thank you, I know what I wrote was kind of abstract, this 
describes my thoughts quite well.