Listening to Walter argue with everyone about const again I had to laugh. Does anyone else notice this pattern?

1) People propose an idea/complaint about a language feature
2) Walter makes a strong case for the way D does it
3) People press the point but Walter is stubborn
4) People get tired of arguing
5) Many months or years pass
6) For unknown reasons Walter changes his mind and makes the proposed change

I remember a time when Walter disliked the idea of adding templates to D.  I also remember a time when Walter argued furiously against adding const. More recently he defended at length the 3-keyword const implementation.  He always argues his points so adamantly that whenever he changes his mind it seems like a religious conversion. :)

-Craig

"Craig Black" <cblack@ara.com> wrote in message news:fims7s$u44$1@digitalmars.com...
> Listening to Walter argue with everyone about const again I had to laugh. Does anyone else notice this pattern?
>
> 1) People propose an idea/complaint about a language feature
> 2) Walter makes a strong case for the way D does it
> 3) People press the point but Walter is stubborn
> 4) People get tired of arguing
> 5) Many months or years pass
> 6) For unknown reasons Walter changes his mind and makes the proposed
> change
>
> I remember a time when Walter disliked the idea of adding templates to D. I also remember a time when Walter argued furiously against adding const. More recently he defended at length the 3-keyword const implementation. He always argues his points so adamantly that whenever he changes his mind it seems like a religious conversion. :)

Inner classes, all the import features, opAssign, and implicit casts are a few other features I can think of that came about this way.

Craig Black Wrote:

> Listening to Walter argue with everyone about const again I had to laugh. Does anyone else notice this pattern?
> 
> 1) People propose an idea/complaint about a language feature
> 2) Walter makes a strong case for the way D does it
> 3) People press the point but Walter is stubborn
> 4) People get tired of arguing
> 5) Many months or years pass
> 6) For unknown reasons Walter changes his mind and makes the proposed change
> 
> I remember a time when Walter disliked the idea of adding templates to D.  I also remember a time when Walter argued furiously against adding const. More recently he defended at length the 3-keyword const implementation.  He always argues his points so adamantly that whenever he changes his mind it seems like a religious conversion. :)
> 
> -Craig
> 
> 

So does this mean the system is broken or that it works? :-)

Paul

Reply to Craig,

> Listening to Walter argue with everyone about const again I had to
> laugh. Does anyone else notice this pattern?
> 
> 1) People propose an idea/complaint about a language feature
> 2) Walter makes a strong case for the way D does it
> 3) People press the point but Walter is stubborn
> 4) People get tired of arguing
> 5) Many months or years pass
> 6) For unknown reasons Walter changes his mind and makes the proposed
> change
> I remember a time when Walter disliked the idea of adding templates to
> D.  I also remember a time when Walter argued furiously against adding
> const. More recently he defended at length the 3-keyword const
> implementation.  He always argues his points so adamantly that
> whenever he changes his mind it seems like a religious conversion. :)
> 
> -Craig
> 

Wow! That sneaky man! He's bating us to drive a debate. That is an incredibly cool way to hash out designs. And the long wait would be to keep us from catching on.

(The above is said in a joking but not condescending tone. I don't known that his is what Walter is doing but if it is, it is actually a rather interesting way to do stuff.)

BCS wrote:
> 
> Wow! That sneaky man! He's bating us to drive a debate. That is an incredibly cool way to hash out designs. And the long wait would be to keep us from catching on.
> 
> (The above is said in a joking but not condescending tone. I don't known that his is what Walter is doing but if it is, it is actually a rather interesting way to do stuff.)

I've done this from time to time with Tango, because I discovered that it is extremely difficult to solicit feedback for theoretical changes. Much easier to just do something that seems reasonable, let everyone know what was done, and then wait for people to complain.


Sean

"Paul Anderson" <paul.d.anderson.removethis@comcast.andthis.net> wrote in message news:fin002$16l8$1@digitalmars.com...
> Craig Black Wrote:
>
>> Listening to Walter argue with everyone about const again I had to laugh. Does anyone else notice this pattern?
>>
>> 1) People propose an idea/complaint about a language feature
>> 2) Walter makes a strong case for the way D does it
>> 3) People press the point but Walter is stubborn
>> 4) People get tired of arguing
>> 5) Many months or years pass
>> 6) For unknown reasons Walter changes his mind and makes the proposed
>> change
>>
>> I remember a time when Walter disliked the idea of adding templates to D.
>> I
>> also remember a time when Walter argued furiously against adding const.
>> More recently he defended at length the 3-keyword const implementation.
>> He
>> always argues his points so adamantly that whenever he changes his mind
>> it
>> seems like a religious conversion. :)
>>
>> -Craig
>>
>>
>
> So does this mean the system is broken or that it works? :-)
>
> Paul

Walter's doing a great job IMO.  I guess you could say he just has a unique procedure for assimilating proposed language features..

At least I believe in what I'm doing!

"Walter Bright" <newshound1@digitalmars.com> wrote in message news:fin810$1oi5$3@digitalmars.com...
> At least I believe in what I'm doing!

Keep up the good work!

Craig Black wrote:
> Listening to Walter argue with everyone about const again I had to laugh. Does anyone else notice this pattern?
> 
> 1) People propose an idea/complaint about a language feature
> 2) Walter makes a strong case for the way D does it
> 3) People press the point but Walter is stubborn
> 4) People get tired of arguing
> 5) Many months or years pass
> 6) For unknown reasons Walter changes his mind and makes the proposed change
> 
> I remember a time when Walter disliked the idea of adding templates to D.  I also remember a time when Walter argued furiously against adding const. More recently he defended at length the 3-keyword const implementation.  He always argues his points so adamantly that whenever he changes his mind it seems like a religious conversion. :)

I think that's precisely his job.  Nobody wants to use a language that's changing its grammar on a weekly basis.  So his job is to keep it as stable as possible and not change it without overwhelmingly convincing evidence that a change would be an overall win.

--bb

BCS wrote:
> Reply to Craig,
> 
>> Listening to Walter argue with everyone about const again I had to
>> laugh. Does anyone else notice this pattern?
>>
>> 1) People propose an idea/complaint about a language feature
>> 2) Walter makes a strong case for the way D does it
>> 3) People press the point but Walter is stubborn
>> 4) People get tired of arguing
>> 5) Many months or years pass
>> 6) For unknown reasons Walter changes his mind and makes the proposed
>> change
>> I remember a time when Walter disliked the idea of adding templates to
>> D.  I also remember a time when Walter argued furiously against adding
>> const. More recently he defended at length the 3-keyword const
>> implementation.  He always argues his points so adamantly that
>> whenever he changes his mind it seems like a religious conversion. :)
>>
>> -Craig
>>
> 
> Wow! That sneaky man! He's bating us to drive a debate. That is an incredibly cool way to hash out designs. And the long wait would be to keep us from catching on.
> 
> (The above is said in a joking but not condescending tone. I don't known that his is what Walter is doing but if it is, it is actually a rather interesting way to do stuff.)

Isn't that how Linus Torvalds works?