On 11/14/12 1:25 AM, Don Clugston wrote:
On 12/11/12 20:42, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Monday, November 12, 2012 11:36:38 H. S. Teoh wrote:
I contend that the problem with built-in AA's is their implementation,
not the fact that they're built-in.
Oh, I agree, but we, as a group, have obviously failed to handle the
implementation of the built-in AAs properly, and I think that the
indications
are definitely that it's harder to get the built-in AAs right that it
would be
to create a library solution.
I disagree with that 100%.
Built-in AAs in D1 work fine (They could use a lot of improvement, but
there's nothing wrong with the basic approach, it's quite simple). It
was the idea that they could be seamlessly moved to a library type that
was an unmitigated disaster.
And for some reason, there has been a refusal to roll it back to the old
method which worked.
I think it is an absolute must that we move forward with a library
implementation.
The thing that really really should change is the bizarre 'magic null'
semantics of AAs.
This is new! What does this mean?
Andrei
