Tell us your DIP1000 woes

[Juraj]

On Sunday, 25 August 2024 at 13:10:22 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
> **Please do not reply to posts in this thread unless you have 
> additional relevant information regarding the problem 
> described.** We want to collect examples, and any side 
> discussions will just be noise.
>
> Thanks!

I am probably adding to the noise, but I think this is relevant.
I can not be the only one, that can not provide a bug report or a 
code snipped because I just lost interest in pursuing DIP1000 
compatibility years ago.

In the end the whole thing just feels off, and is one of my major 
concerns about going `@safe` by default.

In all seriousness I am not willing to look at a function 
signature full of `return` keywords and figuring out what it 
means. More so, not gonna spend my energy writing such thing.

> First, it's pretty clear that inference by default is necessary 
> to make DIP1000 easier to use. It's not clear at the moment how 
> this can be achieved, but it's something that we need to work 
> out.

In my opinion, without this, there will just not be enough users.

(I written a bigger rant, but lets keep it simple)

Juraj