"Walter Bright" <newshound1@digitalmars.com> wrote in message news:fash0i$11ie$1@digitalmars.com...
> At the conference, I was asked in various ways how bug fixes and improvements are prioritized, given that so much needs to be done.
>
> The short answer is, it's ad hoc. The longer answer is I have some vague notion of whatever bubbles to the top of a cost/benefit analysis.
<snip>

Where do _discussions of_ improvements (whether your ideas or someone else's) fit into the prioritizing scheme?

Stewart. 

"Stewart Gordon" <smjg_1998@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:fb1cdn$842$1@digitalmars.com...

> Why not just see 340, rather than singling out a few (one of which is a duplicate of another anyway)?

The point of mentioning the duplicate issue is that multiple people have run into the same problem over a long period of time.

> Moreover, is 282 really a forward reference issue?

I can't find any other good explanation.  As far as I know those kinds of "type blah blah blah does not exist" when dealing with nested types comes up most often when one thing is semantically analyzed before the type it depends upon has been, so even though the error doesn't say "forward reference" it's a side effect of the same issue.

Stewart Gordon wrote:
> Where do _discussions of_ improvements (whether your ideas or someone else's) fit into the prioritizing scheme?

Here.

On Fri, 31 Aug 2007, Walter Bright wrote:

> Stewart Gordon wrote:
> > Where do _discussions of_ improvements (whether your ideas or someone else's) fit into the prioritizing scheme?
> 
> Here.

Nit picky.. but not digitalmars.D.announce, surely.  How about digitalmars.D instead.

Later,
Brad

Brad Roberts wrote:
> On Fri, 31 Aug 2007, Walter Bright wrote:
> 
>> Stewart Gordon wrote:
>>> Where do _discussions of_ improvements (whether your ideas or someone
>>> else's) fit into the prioritizing scheme?
>> Here.
> 
> Nit picky.. but not digitalmars.D.announce, surely.  How about digitalmars.D instead.

Right. My bad.

"Brad Roberts" <braddr@puremagic.com> wrote in message news:Pine.LNX.4.64.0708311727460.3074@bellevue.puremagic.com...
> On Fri, 31 Aug 2007, Walter Bright wrote:
>
>> Stewart Gordon wrote:
>> > Where do _discussions of_ improvements (whether your ideas or someone
>> > else's) fit into the prioritizing scheme?
>>
>> Here.
>
> Nit picky.. but not digitalmars.D.announce, surely.  How about
> digitalmars.D instead.

Either way, I'm not sure about how one would fit a newsgroup into a prioritizing scheme ... they just don't seem the right shapes for each other.

Stewart.