Walter wrote:

> One of the hardest things in designing D is saying "no". I really do, deep
> down, want to implement everyone's features. But I know it would be a
> disaster for D to do this, both because it is an infinite time sink and 40
> slightly different ways to do the same thing would just be a huge turnoff.
> So I'm left with making a decision about which way to go, often the decision
> is a little arbitrary, as making a less than perfect decision is better than
> indecision.



(...)
The question should never be "X, yes or no?" As long as you have limited time and resources, you always have to look at the cost and the benefit of X. Questions should be "Is X worth the time" or "Will X or Y have a greater return on investment?"
(...)
-- Joel Spolsky


> But that's not to say these decisions get made in a vacuum, quite the
> contrary. This newsgroup and the opinions and eloquence of the smart people
> here making their case is extremely valuable in trying to figure out the
> right direction to go. A very large part of D's design has come out of this
> newsgroup, and D would not be the big success it is today without it.


-- 
Julio César Carrascal Urquijo

"Julio César Carrascal Urquijo" <adnoctum@phreaker.net> wrote in message news:c6jrct$1aev$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> (...)
> The question should never be "X, yes or no?" As long as you have limited
> time and resources, you always have to look at the cost and the benefit
> of X. Questions should be "Is X worth the time" or "Will X or Y have a
> greater return on investment?"
> (...)
> -- Joel Spolsky

Of course. Each proposal gets a cost benefit evaluation.