DIP10005: Dependency-Carrying Declarations is now available for community feedback

[Chris Wright via Digitalmars-d]

On Sat, 17 Dec 2016 19:34:12 -0500, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> Most of these have been the case with all C++ and D projects I've been
> involved with at Facebook.

I've had similar frustrations when using C# without an IDE (which is a 
problem because it encourages larger namespaces), and somewhat with 
Python (though much worse because of the lack of static typing).

D doesn't have either of those pitfalls, so I haven't seen it cause 
problems. I'm also a bit skeptical that this will see much use outside 
phobos.

This isn't really an argument against it. I just don't see any argument 
for it, not that's supported by my own experience.

> Please let me know what of this information I should include in the DIP
> to make it better. Thanks.

You don't mention improved documentation as an option for readability.

As a general comment, the Rationale section takes a while to get to the 
benefits (and with it the associated problems that the DIP is trying to 
address).

My advisor in college exhorted us to be *prefix-competitive* in our 
papers and talks: your audience is present at the start but will get 
bored and wander off at some random point, so make sure that you maximize 
the impact of the part of the message they hear. Every prefix of your 
talk should include as much value as you can pack into that many words.