On Friday, 28 February 2014 at 10:45:53 UTC, Regan Heath wrote:
On Thu, 27 Feb 2014 18:29:55 -0000, Szymon Gatner
<[email protected]> wrote:
On Thursday, 27 February 2014 at 18:06:58 UTC, John Colvin
wrote:
On Thursday, 27 February 2014 at 14:52:00 UTC, Szymon Gatner
wrote:
On Thursday, 27 February 2014 at 14:42:43 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
There is also one complex and feature-reach implementation
of uniqueness concept by Sonke Ludwig :
https://github.com/rejectedsoftware/vibe.d/blob/master/source/vibe/core/concurrency.d#L281
(Isolated!T)
Priceless for message passing concurrency.
Tbh it only looks worse and worse to me :(
Another example of code necessary to overcome language
limitations.
Or, alternatively:
A language flexible enough to facilitate library solutions
for problems that would normally require explicit language
support.
I dig flexibility, I really do, and I appreciate D's features
that enable that, but in case of such basic thing as a
resource management, I just want things to work without
surprises by default.
Amen. (Not used religiously)
I have been around D for a long time, and I have noticed a
growing trend of solving problems with "clever" but complicated
library solutions when in *some* cases a simpler built-in
solution was possible. I realise Walter's time is precious and
I realise that adding complexity to the language itself is
something to be generally avoided, but I think sometimes we
make the wrong choice.
R
Yeah scope -> scoped is IMO such a wrong choice. :)
