On Friday, 8 July 2016 at 18:04:16 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
"Oops, can't let checkedint happen but I can't criticize
without proposing an alternative so forget RCStr and let me
work on that"
...
On 07/08/2016 05:17 AM, Robert burner Schadek wrote:
People would have a go to place
looking for pre-approved work. Leading to no more gatekeeper
rejection frustration.
I don't think preapproved work would lead to less rejection.
Rejection is of work of insufficient quality, not of work that
has not been preapproved. Conversely, preapproval does not
guarantee any work will be actually approaved.
My bid for inclusion of `checkedint` in Phobos fizzled because I
want to solve a different (though overlapping) set of problems
than you do.
No matter how much I iterate and improve my work you still won't
be satisfied, because our goals are incompatible and I'm not
interested in discarding mine in favor of yours. This is clear
from the response you gave when I explained in some detail the
reasons for my design:
https://forum.dlang.org/post/njss1a$2ig5$1...@digitalmars.com
Even if it were the case that there's no smaller design that
conforms with the requirements, that means requirements have a
problem.
You neither gave any *specific* suggestions as to how I could
better meet my requirements, not did you state which of my
numbered requirements, *specifically* was unreasonable or
unnecessary. All of the major suggestions that you did give
revolved around adding new requirements (like support for
arbitrary bound ranges and user-defined error handling), while
somehow shrinking the code base. Something had to give.
Repeatedly dismissing this obvious goals mismatch as
"insufficient quality" on my part is abrasive and unhelpful.
Communicating clear requirements for projects ahead of time via
pre-approval could help ensure that people who volunteer are
actually working on something you want. Obviously I'm not the
volunteer you're looking for, but maybe if we'd all known that I
wouldn't have taken ownership of the project, and someone else
would already have made what you want, instead.
