On Tuesday, 14 March 2017 at 16:29:15 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
On Tuesday, 14 March 2017 at 15:44:27 UTC, Inquie wrote:
So, with all the bloviating, all I have arrived at is that my
original hack is still the only way to get the cold folding I
wanted(the original use case I had in mind, even though I'd
rather have proper code structuring support in general).
Generally when even a hint of a suggestion of a language
addition is created, the worms come out to party...
If it's something you feel strongly about, then the way to go
about it is to put together a DIP. There was a time when you
could open a forum post about a new feature and eventually see
it added, but those days are long gone (for good reason). If
any new feature is going to have any hope of getting in these
days, then it needs someone to champion it through the DIP
process.
It's not that I feel strongly about, I simply would like the best
useable solution. Like usually what happens, my original post was
taken completely out of context:
"Does D have any nice way to specify a block for cold folding? I
have a very large set of structs and I'd like to be able to code
fold them all at once and together.
I have been using
static if(true)
{
... junk
}
but the static if is uninformative since that is the only line
that is shown when folded. A comment helps but still kinda ugly.
C# has #regions and hopefully D has something as useful.
"
No where do I mention anything about a language change. I asked
if D had something useful and better than my hack. What it seems
to stir up is a bunch of people that have a fear based reaction,
which I can only hypothesize why. Usually it involves someone
trying to state absolutely why what I am doing is wrong or bad
and all they offer is anecdotal evidence and their opinions. None
of which are helpful or useful.
I would wager that more than 50% of D users have this mentality,
and given that, it is highly unlikely that I could push for such
changes. I'd get more done and have more use by forking D and
adding my own features for my own personal use.
What perplexes me is why so many have such a disdain for any
change that ultimately doesn't effect them much. If, say the
"#regions" feature was implement, or some variant, and they are
right and it is useless then chances of them ever encountering
such code is slim... and code they do encounter would generally
not a a problem(light use). Yet, those that do use it(in house),
which, if it is so bad, according to them, should be rare, would
benefit from it, at least in their own mind.
You know, there is something called "Survival of the fittest" and
if an idea is truly bad then it will die out. Many people don't
even want to give any idea a chance to go through that process...
fear of it being successful? Fear they might have to learn
something new? Fear it might require them to adapt their
understanding of how things work? Fear of it being a waste of
time? Fear of it causing a nuclear meltdown? When it will affect
them almost nil, and they rail against it, it is some deep seeded
fear from something... Unless they can give nearly absolute
mathematical proof why it is invalid/wrong.
Anyways, my hack is good enough for me. If they ever see any of
my code, they might rather have allowed something a bit more
syntactically pleasing and so they can blame themselves(which
they won't). Of course, we could always depreciate "static if
(true)" to prevent that possibility! Maybe that is the real
solution?
