Vision 2016 H1

[Ola Fosheim Grøstad via Digitalmars-d]

On Monday, 25 January 2016 at 16:31:50 UTC, JohnCK wrote:
> On Monday, 25 January 2016 at 16:02:09 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
>> On Monday, 25 January 2016 at 15:45:09 UTC, Ola Fosheim 
>> Grøstad wrote:
> Please guys don't get stuck on small things like this. I'm 
> seeing this behavior growing up in here.

It is not a small thing in the sense that it affects D's ability 
to complete features before adding more features.

Let's follow the metaphores:

- Andrei is the general.
- Walter is the general/special forces.

The special forces are highly skilled, but don't bring common 
soldiers along. They don't exercise leadership, but swiftly 
implement features on direct orders from the generals: like C++ 
exceptions, UDAs etc.

Here's the problem: features are added before the existing 
features are completed without any documentation/rationale for 
why the new features are of the highest priority.

This goes on while the population is suffering from traffic jam 
caused by a lack of basic infrastructure like non-GC 
memory-management.

Is the lack of memory management a small thing? Hell no. So why 
isn't it of the highest priority? Because it is difficult to 
design?

Well, then you need to replace the generals with a process that 
can bring in more viewpoints.

Now, in defense of Andrei, I'll say that he has become much less 
of a general in the past two years, and more of an enabler, and 
that he also created a forum to allow more viewpoints to be 
presented. But the generals aren't nurturing the process! And the 
implementation of D still depends on Walter operating as the 
special forces rather than bringing other people up closer to his 
level...

Not a small problem. Establishing a better process with better 
yield is a challenging problem. It won't happen by itself.


> And please don't waste your time answering this.

So you are basically in favour of censorship? Which is an 
authoritarian mode of leadership. Thus you don't mind having 
generals as a metaphor.

Don't you think that people can decide for themselves which 
debates they want to engage in? Which is a more democratic way of 
organizing decision making processes.