Should we remove int[$] before 2.067?

[Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d]

On 1/30/2015 10:21 AM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> On 1/30/15 9:57 AM, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:
>> If it wasn't a good idea, I don't have a problem with reverting it, but
>> what I'm wondering is, why raise the objection *now* rather than *months*
>> ago when the PR was sitting in the queue idle? From the discussion on
>> github, it appeared that the only objection against it was that Walter
>> didn't like the syntax. Where were the arguments about it being a
>> superfluous syntax change? Why raise the objections now rather than back
>> then?
>>
>> I think we need to improve the process here. If a PR is not up to par or
>> is a bad idea, or approval from Walter/Andrei is required, can we pretty
>> please mark it as such beforehand? Rather than, as it would appear, let
>> it sit there until someone merges it, only to parachute in after the
>> fact to blast it to bits? (I know that's not the intention, but that's
>> what it looks like, since I've lost count of how many months this
>> particular PR was sitting in the queue with only minor nitpicks raised
>> against it and no sign of imminent doom like it's made out to be now.)
>
> I agree we could and should improve the process here. The way it's been handled
> has been quite inefficient.
>
> You should know that I had pulled the request. So I was okay with it because I
> non-critically assumed it wasn't doable within the current language. I was
> obviously mistaken.
>
> Such indecision/change of mind should not repeat often in the future. But the
> fact is it did happen this time, which is frustrating to everyone involved.


Sometimes taking action stimulates thinking about it that never would happen 
otherwise. I don't see how adding more process would have the same effect.