DIP74 - where is at?

[Jacob via Digitalmars-d]

On Monday, 12 October 2015 at 07:21:58 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
> On Monday, 12 October 2015 at 06:02:47 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu 
> wrote:
>>> There are not considered because DIP25 is "simpler" and you 
>>> and Walter
>>> "like it". As long as nothing changes here, there is really 
>>> no point in
>>> wasting my time.
>>
>> That is a fair assessment. Basically I believe DIP25 is good 
>> language design, and I have evidence for it. The evidence you 
>> showed failed to convince me the design is a hack, and yelling 
>> at me is unlikely to help. Please decide as you find fit. At 
>> some point it is clear that several language designers will 
>> disagree on estimating the quality of something.
>>
>
> If you are wondering why I'm inflammatory, here you go. You are 
> pulling me the old prove a negative trick. You have good 
> evidence that DIP25 is good design ? Good, because I have none. 
> And that's my proof. As long as I have no evidence that DIP25 
> is good, DIP25 is bad.
>

I've noticed that you seem to be quite arrogant. Usually it is a 
result of ignorance. Your statement basically proves that.

Maybe you should take a break from programming for a while and 
work on your attitude?

While you have no proof of this, If you do a little soul 
searching you'll find that the world doesn't revolve around you. 
Put down your toys and get out of the sandbox and you might learn 
something!