Exceptions in @nogc code

[Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d]

On 4/6/17 9:05 AM, deadalnix wrote:
> You can point me as the lazy bum here, but there is a reasons why the 
> lifetime ML died. You ignored all proposal that weren't your own and 
> people stopped participating. I'm just the only one persistent enough to 
> continue pointing it out.

Persistent is best when it leads to palpable results. We seem to be in 
an impasse that is difficult to overcome: discussing complex language 
design matters is tenuous over forum communication, but investing effort 
upfront into a proposal that may not be approved is a high cost.

One thing that would be great to factor out of the conversation is the 
finger pointing and accusations. I have absolutely no doubt you have the 
best interests at heart. On our side, we are here to help the D 
community best we can. Yes, there are ideas we don't consider good to 
pursue, but that doesn't automatically make us neither malicious nor 
incompetent.

There is this whole "you are ignoring others' ideas" and "we demand that 
this is listened to" that is sadly quite harmful. There is not ignoring 
as much as the difficulty on working on someone else's rough idea, while 
they simultaneously refuse to flesh it out. Going by our design 
sensibilities we consider our take on Exception workable. We know how to 
pursue it, make a detailed DIP for it, accompany it with a proof of 
concept implementation, and deploy it. At the same time we have gathered 
a very hazy understanding of your ideas from a few posts lacking detail 
- posts that even you can't find, refer, and formalize. We don't think 
it's reasonable that you consider us at fault for not pursuing your ideas.


Andrei