On Friday, 28 October 2022 at 12:37:22 UTC, Paul Backus wrote:

The only fix is to make it a builtin language feature, the burden should not be on the users

It is similar with Nullable

Try to compile this: https://github.com/d-language-server/dls

And try to decipher the error messages full of template mess

On Friday, 28 October 2022 at 14:02:37 UTC, ryuukk_ wrote:

We do have a builtin nullable. Given a type T, the builtin nullable variant of it is T*.

On Friday, 28 October 2022 at 14:15:28 UTC, Dukc wrote:

We should have learnt from Kotlin, C#, Zig, Rust and countless more languages, and make it ? and call it optional, but nope, it had to be a template, and the syntax changed at will by its author without consertation and consideration for its users!

On Friday, 28 October 2022 at 14:19:20 UTC, ryuukk_ wrote:

Rust do not have a "type?" in order to make it an optional what I know about. You have to use Optional. The Rust syntax is very explicit and often not that nice to read. Also Rust does not have optional chaining (ex. let i = var1?.var2?.var3) like C# and Swift which is really nice. In Rust you must use "and_then" or nested if let statements which is super ugly.

On Friday, 28 October 2022 at 14:15:28 UTC, Dukc wrote:

I really wonder whether we'd have problems with nullables if scope T* a = new T() always allocated on the stack, with some way to denote to allocate on the heap if one wants to do that

On Friday, 28 October 2022 at 12:36:48 UTC, ryuukk_ wrote:

PHP is hardly a competitor to D.

Has C or C++ actually added sum types to their standards?

D templates are fast, unlike in C++. Maybe you're using other features like CTFE slowing things down. Or maybe the front end isn't using GC and you're short on memory. Either way doesn't seem like a fundamental criticism of std.sumtype, though they may exist.

On Friday, 28 October 2022 at 14:42:14 UTC, IGotD- wrote:

I should have developed further, but you did it for me so thanks

On Friday, 28 October 2022 at 14:43:54 UTC, Nick Treleaven wrote:

It was proposed and feedback was favorable, it's only just a matter of when now

On Friday, 28 October 2022 at 14:47:27 UTC, ryuukk_ wrote:

Do you have a link? I saw the circle compiler extension and feedback wasn't all favourable. Standardising something is long and arduous.

On Friday, 28 October 2022 at 14:49:28 UTC, Nick Treleaven wrote:

Here is the latest revision i could find

https://www.open-std.org/jtc1/sc22/wg21/docs/papers/2020/p1371r3.pdf

And Bjarne Stroustrup thoughts

https://www.open-std.org/JTC1/SC22/WG21/docs/papers/2021/p2411r0.pdf