is this considered inconsistency?

[Imperatorn]

On Sunday, 21 March 2021 at 22:59:26 UTC, mw wrote:
> On Sunday, 21 March 2021 at 22:56:43 UTC, mw wrote:
>> On Sunday, 21 March 2021 at 21:22:16 UTC, Paul Backus wrote:
>>> [...]
>>
>> "compatible with C" as a goal of D?
>>
>> Then why we need D? C++ has been there already 😎
>>
>>
>> Instead of let a few people decide, how about also let the 
>> users decide?
>>
>> I have read -dipxxx switches are kind of previews (not 
>> formally in to the language).
>>
>> How about add a -dip-no-explicit-conversion preview, but ask 
>> the users permission to send their actuall complier build 
>> flags (of their daily work) back to dlang.org, and let that 
>> statistics be part of the decision factor?
>>
>> E.g, if 99.999% of the users always have that flag turned on, 
>> why not have that feature into the language?
>
>
> Typo:
> -dip-no-implicit-conversion

It would probably have to be the other way around though. Begin 
by having a --allow-implicit-conversion, then after x amount of 
time it could possibly be default. But this is a major thing so I 
doubt it