DIP1000 observation

[Richard (Rikki) Andrew Cattermole]

On 26/08/2024 5:55 AM, Bruce Carneal wrote:
> The lesson I take from the DIP 1000 history is that we need something 
> that is simpler to explain, something that is much easier to use 
> correctly, something that models the problem more clearly.

I have another observation that I believe to be the final nail in 
DIP1000's current scope of design.

What people refer to it as, is DIP1000. Its DIP number.

This includes both Walter and Dennis.

It is not called scoped pointers or escape analysis.

The human mind is highly associative, the fact that it is not connecting 
the dots on this is a major concern that it is not in fact solving a 
problem that people have, let alone model in their mind.

This should of happened in the last 10 years, yet it hasn't.