On Sun, 07 Nov 2010 19:12:02 -0600 Andrei Alexandrescu <seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org> wrote:
> On 11/7/10 1:54 PM, retard wrote: > > Sun, 07 Nov 2010 19:39:09 +0200, so wrote: > > > >>> Andrei's stance is, either a library addon or ship D without that > >>> feature. D's library already contains both tuples and algebraic data > >>> types. They're simple to use, almost like in Python. The reason for > >>> library addons isn't that builtin features make less sense, the reason > >>> is that TDPL is already out and we can't improve the language in any > >>> radical way. > >> > >> Lets talk about solution in this thread more than politics, politics > >> "never" improve anything. > > > > There was this other thread here -- "why a part of d community do not > > want to go to d2?" > > > > One reason is, there's no good process for handling these feature > > proposals. Walter attends useless bikeshed discussions and spreads > > misinformation about things he doesn't get, Andrei has excellent > > knowledge of languages but he often prefers staying in the background. > > > > There are these DIPs in wiki4d. Were they useful? At least it seems that > > this thread is leading nowhere. Half of the people don't know what non- > > nullable means. > > In all honesty, the distribution of those who don't understand non-null > is about equal across the proponents and the opponents :o). Perhaps a great help would be to approach it so-to-say backwards: option types à la Haskell http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Option_type (The fact that our pointers are nullable by default makes it difficult to imagine the opposited pov, I guess.) Denis -- -- -- -- -- -- -- vit esse estrany ☣ spir.wikidot.com