On Tuesday, 16 January 2024 at 20:07:08 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
> In general, we've been much more willing to accept PRs that we can back out of if they don't turn out well.
>
> For example, improvements to debug support, better code generation, stdatomic.d, fixing bugs, adding statistics to dmd's output, things like that.
>
> Language changes, though, have a much higher bar. The risk there is people rely on it, and then we're stuck with it forever.
>
> For example, `alias this` for classes. The semantics of it were never defined properly, and with many attempts at figuring what the correct semantics must be, never found one that anybody could defend. Worse, many people were using it for classes, and and relied on whatever the compiler did for it.
>
> Hence, we did not want to deprecated it. Instead, we froze its current behavior, and I opposed any further additions to it and/or attempts to fix it. All I can do is just recommend people not use `alias this` in classes.
>
> Rikki's proposal to do UAX31 identifiers I was initially opposed to, but upon reflection realized there was more risk in not doing it than doing it, and so full speed ahead, Rikki!

and this is also a problem. you leave bad features in the language that turned out to not work proberly, instead of just deprecating them.
people don't mind breaking code as much as you think, as long as it doesn't silently break. D doesn't have the adoption rate where not breaking code is justified in any way.

On Thursday, 18 January 2024 at 10:58:07 UTC, Dibyendu Majumdar wrote:
> As a bystander here I have never observed anything good example from the D core team, so not sure what you are talking about. All the disrespect, vitriol seems to come from so called contributors. If it was me, they would just be kicked out if the attacks were personal and disrespectful.

The D core team is always courteous on the forums, but the way they handle contributions often displays a lack of respect for contributors' time and work. I gave some examples in an earlier post. [1]

It is easier to inspire others to be respectful when they can see that you are willing to "walk the walk," and not just "talk the talk."

All that said, I agree completely that personal attacks should not be tolerated.

[1] https://forum.dlang.org/post/hmaiefygkvboruvheakv@forum.dlang.org

On Thursday, 18 January 2024 at 16:07:58 UTC, Paul Backus wrote:
> On Thursday, 18 January 2024 at 10:58:07 UTC, Dibyendu Majumdar wrote:
>> As a bystander here I have never observed anything good example from the D core team, so not sure what you are talking about. All the disrespect, vitriol seems to come from so called contributors. If it was me, they would just be kicked out if the attacks were personal and disrespectful.
>
> The D core team is always courteous on the forums, but the way they handle contributions often displays a lack of respect for contributors' time and work. I gave some examples in an earlier post. [1]
>
>
> [1] https://forum.dlang.org/post/hmaiefygkvboruvheakv@forum.dlang.org

I had a quick look. To be honest none of those examples show disrespect toward contributors. In fact at least 2 of them show disrespect toward Walter.
So I still do not see your point here.

On Thursday, 18 January 2024 at 06:31:33 UTC, Richard (Rikki) Andrew Cattermole wrote:
>
> Of course because Walter keeps saying, I don't care if you insult me (more or less) on the N.G. its not like us moderators can take action, because he has waived an awful lot of the expectation of respect in simply stating that.

+1

Behaviour flows from the top.
It's important to realize a chunk of the newcomers are people, for lack of better words, prone to trolling behaviour that may be attracted by that lax rules enabled by the top of the hierarchy.

It makes the work of being a moderator in the D community much more stressful than people may realize.

On Thursday, 18 January 2024 at 17:07:52 UTC, Dibyendu Majumdar wrote:
> On Thursday, 18 January 2024 at 16:07:58 UTC, Paul Backus wrote:
>> On Thursday, 18 January 2024 at 10:58:07 UTC, Dibyendu Majumdar wrote:
>>> As a bystander here I have never observed anything good example from the D core team, so not sure what you are talking about. All the disrespect, vitriol seems to come from so called contributors. If it was me, they would just be kicked out if the attacks were personal and disrespectful.
>>
>> The D core team is always courteous on the forums, but the way they handle contributions often displays a lack of respect for contributors' time and work. I gave some examples in an earlier post. [1]
>>
>>
>> [1] https://forum.dlang.org/post/hmaiefygkvboruvheakv@forum.dlang.org
>
> I had a quick look. To be honest none of those examples show disrespect toward contributors. In fact at least 2 of them show disrespect toward Walter.
> So I still do not see your point here.

When someone submits a contribution, and you make them wait for weeks or months before you even acknowledge their work, the message you are sending is that their work is not important and their time is not valuable.

When someone shares their ideas, and you dismiss them without even attempting to reach a common understanding, the message you are sending is that their ideas are not worth listening to.

When you require others to follow rules and processes, but exempt yourself from them, the message you are sending is that you do not view those people as your equals.

No matter how polite you are, if you treat people like their work is not important, their time is not valuable, their ideas are not worth listening to, and they are not your equals, then you are not treating them with respect.

On Wednesday, 17 January 2024 at 18:28:33 UTC, Paul Backus wrote:
>
> The problem is not what you did in this specific case; it's the fact that, by the time he submitted the DIP 1036e PR, Adam's relationship with D's leadership had *already* deteriorated so much that he felt only drastic action would get his point across.
>
> What you (and Walter, and Andrei) could, and should, have done is spent the last 10+ years treating Adam with the respect and professionalism he deserved. What you can, and must, do now is (a) determine why you failed to do so, and (b) make plans to ensure that those failures do not recur in the future (either with Adam, should he return, or with other contributors).

I mean, let's all be brutally real here for a minute. I've been in this community since 2012, and I'm familiar with all the regulars and even the old regulars who aren't around anymore.

Adam's always been a bit of a prima donna - the lone wolf developer type who always wants to do things his own way or not at all. If you subscribe to the Jungian personality model, he's most likely an INTJ - very emotionally charged and willful, very sensitive to issues of status and respect, and notoriously difficult to work with.

There's plenty of blame to go around, and ultimately it just comes down to a clash of different personalities and outlooks. People have wildly different motivations, and different standards for what constitutes disrespect, and ways of dealing with it. Not to mention varying levels of maturity and social skills.

Sometimes shit just happens and there's not much you can do to avoid or fix it.