On Fri, Aug 01, 2014 at 01:55:39PM -0700, Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d wrote: > On 8/1/2014 12:09 PM, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote: > > A linguistics professor was lecturing to his class one day. "In > > English," he said, "A double negative forms a positive. In some > > languages, though, such as Russian, a double negative is still a > > negative. However, there is no language wherein a double > > positive can form a negative." A voice from the back of the room > > piped up, "Yeah, yeah." > > English is quite the merry language with this. (Reversing the meaning > of "merry", ho-ho!) > > It's also why D doesn't support ! in version, and why I'm a strong > advocate of not having negated features. > > Of course, D has "no-throw" and "im-mutable". Arggh.
Well, if we could turn back the clock and redesign D based on our experience, we'd have "throwing" and "mutable" as modifiers instead of "nothrow" and "immutable". :) Not to mention "impure" instead of "pure". T -- "Real programmers can write assembly code in any language. :-)" -- Larry Wall