The author of DIP 1039, "Static Arrays with Inferred Length", has requested that the DIP be withdrawn from the review process. After the first round of community review, he felt the general response was negative, and that he needed a strong argument to show the cost-benefit of the proposed feature over the existing library solution, std.array.staticArray. He was unable to formulate such an argument.

The policy on resurrecting Withdrawn DIPs is described in the DIP process documentation. Anyone who would like to resurrect this DIP, or any that has been withdrawn, should contact me to determine how best to do so.

On Saturday, 4 September 2021 at 07:09:15 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:

And here's a link to the DIP.

On Saturday, 4 September 2021 at 08:14:49 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:

It's such a shame because the DIP was very nice and the feature very much needed

It's disappointing to hear that "the community" response was negative, how can someone be against the DIP? this is beyond me

yeah, always STD people the problem...

On Saturday, 4 September 2021 at 12:19:13 UTC, russhy wrote:

Some people wanted it, some people didn't. That's life. That's true for every DIP, sometimes weighted in one direction over the other. You can read the feedback and discussion threads to see what specific points were made for and against the DIP.

I don't know what that means, but the DIP author agreed that the criticism you've quoted was valid. He felt he was unable to counter it sufficiently and therefore would be unable to make a valid case for the DIP.

The DIP has been withdrawn, not rejected. So if you feel strongly enough about it and you think you can provide a convincing motivation for implementing it in preference to the existing library solution, please get in touch with me.