On 2/27/13 5:01 AM, foobar wrote:
Let me emphasize again, I did *not* intend to discuss the specific features, Walter brought that topic up. I intended to point out the lack of good general guidelines for the D design process. And i did actually mention one (partial) solution. I mean no disrespect to the hard work of the contributers and did not wish to discourage them, just to prevent wasted effort due to lack of proper guidelines.
I agree we should have a more organized process.
The other criticism I have is exactly the last paragraph above. Rust is designed in the open and so I can read the weekly minutes and get the bigger picture of the design process, what are the different proposed alternatives, what are the considerations and trade-offs, etc. In D on the other hand, it's all closed. D claims that it is an open source project but all the major design decisions happen personally between you and Walter and this is worse than big company languages that at least publish some articles online.
Four years ago I would've entirely agreed. But right now it's an odd comment to make seeing as we're discussing all major decisions in this group and we're switching full-bore to DIPs.
Andrei
