On 2/8/15 11:58 PM, Dicebot wrote:
On Monday, 9 February 2015 at 07:04:35 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
On 02/08/2015 10:33 PM, Dicebot wrote:

> Trivial proof of concept :
https://github.com/Dicebot/TestDlangAggregated

Great idea. I've been using the following one just to keep up-to-date
with git head dmd and Phobos:

  https://github.com/carlor/dlang-workspace

Ali

Probably about time we merged all those efforts into single standard
solution under D-Programming-Language ;)

I want to get Andrei/Walter on board first though.

Well I have to say something.

This proposal is a good example of a cultural lore we should unlearn: high-churn, low-impact changes. https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/dlang.org/pull/896 is another example. Meaning changes with a large surface that rewire vast areas, yet result in only dingy improvements.

The main problem with these is they're easy to argue in favor of. Yes, an aggregate repository will make certain things easier. I'm unclear on the relative advantages and disadvantages, but I have no doubt Dicebot has some good arguments loaded already. On that pull request, yes, searching the language definition separately is a nice thing to have.

Yet, even after executing e.g. the unified repository to perfection and after everything was said and done, we're like... how much better than we were? What pain points did we fix? What is the impact?

Probably something that's neither important nor urgent.

Yet we do have matters that are important and urgent. We want to improve Phobos' take on memory allocation. Yet not one soul is working on RefCounted. Few know even what needs to be done of it. Why? Why are so many of us dedicating so much energy to tweaking what already works, instead of tackling real problems? Problems that e.g. - pardon my being pedantic - are in the vision document?

Don't get me wrong. It's quite likely a unified repo would be nice. As would be a separate directory for the language definition. But it's just not what we should be on right now.

This culture of riding the stationary bike faster and faster must change. We must hop on the real bike and get to pedaling.


Thanks,

Andrei

Reply via email to