On Sunday, 8 August 2021 at 08:59:16 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:

First and foremost ... thanks for D; your language seems superb :) !

Second: you all are a welcoming community to outsiders/newbies, something not seen very often on these kind of projects.

> All he said was "thank god for mom!"

I am not complaining nor anything like it, I think you know what should have been done and proceeded accordingly giving your vast and indisputable experience and track record, but, as usual, there are two points-of-view for any given problem:

I think I have a better analogy to the car-one:

- NASA/JPL/Boeing/et-al vs SpaceX

For instance JPL won't even let you a minor-minor-minor-deviation on any given issue and so their track record is almost astounding to say the least (let's forget about that *minor* issue involving a metric/imperial conversion). Think mom. Same for NASA/Boeing/and-family ... superb engineers thinking contingencies against the impossible. You got excellent track records but ...

On the other side, when you let loose available unrestricted tools on the wild, you end up with things like SpaceX. The progress we are having right now in a very short span of time (I mean, we, as humanity, not as a SpaceX employee of course) is unheard off. Lots of out-of-the-box-thinkers and what-not at the expense of taking increased risk in order to succeed. And the whole establishment frantically playing catch-up.

Which approach is better ?

Both and neither one; it depends on the point-of-view.

Why do I bring back this analogy ? Because when you give users unrestricted tools/hardware they'll surely find ways of doing things you can never dreamed of. That's how innovation works. At the expense of risk, of course, you can't have both at the same time.

And in our tech-sphere, same with hardware vendors: they want you to use their products the way they suit them for whatever reasons ($) and people always find ways to build superb things out-of-the-intended use-case ... just think google and hardware vendors on the beginnings before this hyper-scale thing became into existence.

Again: I am not complaining, I am very happy with D so far, it is your project, your language, you can do whatever you want with it the way you like :)

It is just I found this such a goood topic !

On Sunday, 8 August 2021 at 14:30:29 UTC, Max Samukha wrote:
> On Sunday, 8 August 2021 at 08:59:16 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
>
>>
>> I replaced it all with versions, and the problems went away.
>
> You have just dismissed the problems caused by your solution, as you often do.

Why the personal attack? What does it add here?

I see these from time to time and they distract from the topic at hand. Sometimes even souring the discussion.

On Sunday, 8 August 2021 at 16:15:00 UTC, Kyle Ingraham wrote:
> Why the personal attack?

That's directly addressing the argument, not a personal attack.

Imagine going to a mechanic and saying "my car shakes and thumps" and getting the answer "just don't drive it then, no more shaking!"

True, but presumably you were driving the car for a reason, like maybe you had some place to be and that's not going to change. So you need some kind of solution. Maybe it is to ride a bike or take the bus, but you can't just ignore that need while saying "the problems went away".

On Sunday, 8 August 2021 at 16:15:00 UTC, Kyle Ingraham wrote:

>
> Why the personal attack? What does it add here?

I did it out of frustration with an issue that has a long history. Shouldn't have done that, sorry. I promise not to post here again.

On Sunday, 8 August 2021 at 16:38:41 UTC, Adam D Ruppe wrote:
> On Sunday, 8 August 2021 at 16:15:00 UTC, Kyle Ingraham wrote:
>> Why the personal attack?
>
> That's directly addressing the argument, not a personal attack.
>
> Imagine going to a mechanic and saying "my car shakes and thumps" and getting the answer "just don't drive it then, no more shaking!"

Or rather, imagine going to a mechanic and saying "my engine heats up and stops", and getting the answer "yep, I checked it out and the radiator's busted. I replaced it for you. You won't be having them heat-ups anymore." And then, because the mechanic didn't go into sufficiently tedious detail to deflect uncharitable criticism, you blow up at him: "why are you COVERING UP the problem with my engine by replacing some random part?!"

On 8/8/2021 6:57 AM, user1234 wrote:
> [indeed](https://youtu.be/HNMlooJeJ2M?t=2453)

Nice!

On 8/8/2021 7:30 AM, Max Samukha wrote:
>> I replaced it all with versions, and the problems went away.
> 
> You have just dismissed the problems caused by your solution, as you often do.

The static if solution was written by people who asserted I was wrong, that they needed that power. I got involved in it is because the static if solution resulted in the predicted bugs, and it fell into my lap to fix the bugs.

No programming technique is without problems, but it's better to use the technique with fewer problems.

I cannot transfer my experience to others, I can only explain. If people want to do things their way on their projects, that's ok, but with the D project we need to follow best practices.

Over time, as people gain experience with D and get comfortable with D best practices, the desire for #if expressions tends to fade, and the value in D's version system becomes evident.