Now this discussion seems settled enough, so I may summarize its results a little (please fix this list if you see an error):

- Andrei Alexandrescu has said this idea doesn't harm but he sees not much evidence this is a problem in C/C++.
- Don has not said how much he likes the idea, but he has shown no technical opposition against it, and I think he may accept it.
- Sean Kelly sees no technical problems in the idea, and I think he accepts it.
- Steven Schveighoffer likes the idea.
- Vladimir Panteleev likes the idea.
- Manfred Nowak seems to like the idea.
- Michel Fortin seems to like this idea.
- Yao G. is opposed (but he has shown to not consider the usage of ~ to concat lines).
- dennis luehring likes the idea.
- klickverbot agrees with the idea.
- Jonathan M Davis agrees with the idea.
- Rainer Deyke has suggested a problem that may be solved or doesn't exists.
- spir seems now more or less OK with the idea, but I am not sure.
- so seems a OK with the idea now, but I am not sure.
- I like this idea.
- Brad Roberts has expressed no opinion on the topic.

On average the answers seem positive. So, Walter are you willing to deprecate automatic joining of adjacent strings (and later turn it into a syntax error, the error message may suggest to add a ~)?

Bye,
bearophile

On 11/11/10 3:33 PM, bearophile wrote:
> Now this discussion seems settled enough, so I may summarize its results a little (please fix this list if you see an error):
>
> - Andrei Alexandrescu has said this idea doesn't harm but he sees not much evidence this is a problem in C/C++.
> - Don has not said how much he likes the idea, but he has shown no technical opposition against it, and I think he may accept it.
> - Sean Kelly sees no technical problems in the idea, and I think he accepts it.
> - Steven Schveighoffer likes the idea.
> - Vladimir Panteleev likes the idea.
> - Manfred Nowak seems to like the idea.
> - Michel Fortin seems to like this idea.
> - Yao G. is opposed (but he has shown to not consider the usage of ~ to concat lines).
> - dennis luehring likes the idea.
> - klickverbot agrees with the idea.
> - Jonathan M Davis agrees with the idea.
> - Rainer Deyke has suggested a problem that may be solved or doesn't exists.
> - spir seems now more or less OK with the idea, but I am not sure.
> - so seems a OK with the idea now, but I am not sure.
> - I like this idea.
> - Brad Roberts has expressed no opinion on the topic.
>
> On average the answers seem positive. So, Walter are you willing to deprecate automatic joining of adjacent strings (and later turn it into a syntax error, the error message may suggest to add a ~)?

Let me ask a related question: if there were a priority list of things that Walter should be busy with, where would this feature be on that list?

Andrei

Freshly added to the normal-priority queue!
Thank goodness.

On Thu, Nov 11, 2010 at 6:11 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu < SeeWebsiteForEmail@erdani.org> wrote:

> On 11/11/10 3:33 PM, bearophile wrote:
>
>> Now this discussion seems settled enough, so I may summarize its results a little (please fix this list if you see an error):
>>
>> - Andrei Alexandrescu has said this idea doesn't harm but he sees not much
>> evidence this is a problem in C/C++.
>> - Don has not said how much he likes the idea, but he has shown no
>> technical opposition against it, and I think he may accept it.
>> - Sean Kelly sees no technical problems in the idea, and I think he
>> accepts it.
>> - Steven Schveighoffer likes the idea.
>> - Vladimir Panteleev likes the idea.
>> - Manfred Nowak seems to like the idea.
>> - Michel Fortin seems to like this idea.
>> - Yao G. is opposed (but he has shown to not consider the usage of ~ to
>> concat lines).
>> - dennis luehring likes the idea.
>> - klickverbot agrees with the idea.
>> - Jonathan M Davis agrees with the idea.
>> - Rainer Deyke has suggested a problem that may be solved or doesn't
>> exists.
>> - spir seems now more or less OK with the idea, but I am not sure.
>> - so seems a OK with the idea now, but I am not sure.
>> - I like this idea.
>> - Brad Roberts has expressed no opinion on the topic.
>>
>> On average the answers seem positive. So, Walter are you willing to deprecate automatic joining of adjacent strings (and later turn it into a syntax error, the error message may suggest to add a ~)?
>>
>
> Let me ask a related question: if there were a priority list of things that Walter should be busy with, where would this feature be on that list?
>
> Andrei
>

Andrei:

> Let me ask a related question: if there were a priority list of things that Walter should be busy with, where would this feature be on that list?

I don't know, I think you and Walter are able to judge the relative priorities of things. In Bugzilla I have about twenty small/tiny breaking changes like this one, some of them are probably already virtually closed. This specific one was sleeping for few months there. If you want to change little but non backwards compatible things in D2 (like disallowing implicit concatenation of strings) you need to do it sooner, because when all people have written lot of D2 code you can't remove/change features any more. So while this bug report is much less important than additive features like for example named function arguments, it has higher priority, because named arguments may be added later, in D3. Seeing how those bug reports are getting dust, I'd like to show them here one by one (because I have shown them all together already, with no answers), so they may receive some attention, like this one. One year from now most or all those very small enhancement requests will probably be useless, and worth closing as WONTFIX with a message like "it's too much late to change this". I'm doing my best to help remove some warts from D2.

Bye,
bearophile

Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> Let me ask a related question: if there were a priority list of things that Walter should be busy with, where would this feature be on that list?

For once, I agree with Bearophile. The adjacent string concatenation was a very very early feature, and the ~ completely supplants it. While I don't think it causes many problems, it's a pointless redundancy and should be removed.

> For once, I agree with Bearophile. The adjacent string concatenation was a very very early feature, and the ~ completely supplants it. While I don't think it causes many problems, it's a pointless redundancy and should be removed.

Agreed; it seems to be a minor change, and the issue of code compatibility is a guenine one, the later such changes are done, the more code breakage occurs.

So receive my humble +1 :)

-- Auria

On 11/11/10 5:59 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
> Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>> Let me ask a related question: if there were a priority list of things
>> that Walter should be busy with, where would this feature be on that
>> list?
>
> For once, I agree with Bearophile. The adjacent string concatenation was
> a very very early feature, and the ~ completely supplants it. While I
> don't think it causes many problems, it's a pointless redundancy and
> should be removed.

I agree too but there are many similarly good ideas (some of which from himself) that are older.

Andrei

> Let me ask a related question: if there were a priority list of things
> that Walter should be busy with, where would this feature be on that list?

i think bearophil just tries to install an community-decision-process and the first post of this thread seems to feel right, all other dicussions ended "without" any result for the commmunity

what about a process like that

bearophile(and others) throws in an idea, dicuss it to the "end"
and then comes an small aproval(summery) post like the first one here - after that all involed people should just say yes/no, and after that it should be clear if walter (as happend here) does like the idea and want to work on it (when time comes), but then it can be put on an more "official" wishlist - and think many of bearophils idea will get on this list

this list is got then a prio from walter, and you and the others...

D isn't missing of good ideas, missing library features etc. - we need
an aproval process

Am 12.11.2010 00:33, schrieb bearophile:
> Now this discussion seems settled enough, so I may summarize its results a little (please fix this list if you see an error):
>
> - Andrei Alexandrescu has said this idea doesn't harm but he sees not much evidence this is a problem in C/C++.
> - Don has not said how much he likes the idea, but he has shown no technical opposition against it, and I think he may accept it.
> - Sean Kelly sees no technical problems in the idea, and I think he accepts it.
> - Steven Schveighoffer likes the idea.
> - Vladimir Panteleev likes the idea.
> - Manfred Nowak seems to like the idea.
> - Michel Fortin seems to like this idea.
> - Yao G. is opposed (but he has shown to not consider the usage of ~ to concat lines).
> - dennis luehring likes the idea.
> - klickverbot agrees with the idea.
> - Jonathan M Davis agrees with the idea.
> - Rainer Deyke has suggested a problem that may be solved or doesn't exists.
> - spir seems now more or less OK with the idea, but I am not sure.
> - so seems a OK with the idea now, but I am not sure.
> - I like this idea.
> - Brad Roberts has expressed no opinion on the topic.
>
> On average the answers seem positive. So, Walter are you willing to deprecate automatic joining of adjacent strings (and later turn it into a syntax error, the error message may suggest to add a ~)?
>
> Bye,
> bearophile

thanks bearopile, i think you made the first step installing an maybe good working idea approval process - let people throw together their pros and cons, and then post an was-that-your-opinion-message
that could ease the decision process for walter,andrei etc. alot - and you can tell others that walter,andrei,ect..... agreed with you're idea - that stops re-dicussions

but the information,results must be published in an more official way digitalmars.com/d/reviews.html or something like that, not an hidden wiki-page somewhere or an personal page like the inoffical wishlist

Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> On 11/11/10 5:59 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
>> Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>>> Let me ask a related question: if there were a priority list of things
>>> that Walter should be busy with, where would this feature be on that
>>> list?
>>
>> For once, I agree with Bearophile. The adjacent string concatenation was
>> a very very early feature, and the ~ completely supplants it. While I
>> don't think it causes many problems, it's a pointless redundancy and
>> should be removed.
> 
> I agree too but there are many similarly good ideas (some of which from himself) that are older.
> 
> Andrei

This isn't new. I remember this one being discussed about seven years ago.