On Mon, Feb 25, 2019 at 9:30 PM Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d-announce <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 2/25/2019 7:17 PM, Manu wrote: > > break my DIP > > The review process is not about "why not add this feature" , but "why should > we > have this feature". > > Additionally, it is most assuredly about finding flaws in it. Isn't it best to > find out the flaws before going further with it than finding them in the > field? > > As I mentioned before, it's supposed to be brutal. Any > testing/certification/review process is about trying to break it. > > It has (hopefully) nothing to do with how hard (or little) you worked on it, > nor > the cut of your jib, nor acceptance (or not) of mediocrity/merit in other > DIPs.
I'm talking about this DIP. Allowing a mutable copy argument feels super weird. The reasons are clear, but that doesn't make it feel less weird. I feel like the problem is with const, not with this DIP, but I'm not about to convince anybody, so we're all good here.
