On Wednesday, November 28, 2018 7:48:27 AM MST Jim Balter via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> Rich Hickey's piece was addressed to entitled assholes and trolls. It's no wonder that a maggot like you responded to it as you did.

Let's please try to be civil. I don't agree with much of what he's said in recent threads either, but insults don't help. They're obviously not nice, and in general, they tend to just lead to more angry posts (from both sides) that waste everyone's time.

- Jonathan M Davis

On Wednesday, 28 November 2018 at 17:05:57 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> On Wednesday, November 28, 2018 7:48:27 AM MST Jim Balter via Digitalmars-d wrote:
>> Rich Hickey's piece was addressed to entitled assholes and trolls. It's no wonder that a maggot like you responded to it as you did.
>
> Let's please try to be civil. I don't agree with much of what he's said in recent threads either, but insults don't help. They're obviously not nice, and in general, they tend to just lead to more angry posts (from both sides) that waste everyone's time.
>
> - Jonathan M Davis

Can moderators "delete" certain post or am I blind?

On Wednesday, 28 November 2018 at 20:21:04 UTC, welkam wrote:
> On Wednesday, 28 November 2018 at 17:05:57 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
>> On Wednesday, November 28, 2018 7:48:27 AM MST Jim Balter via Digitalmars-d wrote:
>>> Rich Hickey's piece was addressed to entitled assholes and trolls. It's no wonder that a maggot like you responded to it as you did.
>>
>> Let's please try to be civil. I don't agree with much of what he's said in recent threads either, but insults don't help. They're obviously not nice, and in general, they tend to just lead to more angry posts (from both sides) that waste everyone's time.
>>
>> - Jonathan M Davis
>
> Can moderators "delete" certain post or am I blind?

Apparently. I had read that response and saw then that it was gone. The D forum page had an empty column where there is normally the link to the last unread entry.

On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 08:35:33PM +0000, Patrick Schluter via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On Wednesday, 28 November 2018 at 20:21:04 UTC, welkam wrote:
[...]
> > Can moderators "delete" certain post or am I blind?
> 
> Apparently. I had read that response and saw then that it was gone. The D forum page had an empty column where there is normally the link to the last unread entry.

Deleting posts off the NNTP server does not delete it for people who have already received them, though. E.g., through the mailing list interface.  But at least it won't show up for "future" readers.


T

-- 
Being forced to write comments actually improves code, because it is easier to fix a crock than to explain it. -- G. Steele

On Wednesday, 28 November 2018 at 20:54:40 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 28, 2018 at 08:35:33PM +0000, Patrick Schluter via Digitalmars-d wrote:
>> On Wednesday, 28 November 2018 at 20:21:04 UTC, welkam wrote:
> [...]
>> > Can moderators "delete" certain post or am I blind?
>> 
>> Apparently. I had read that response and saw then that it was gone. The D forum page had an empty column where there is normally the link to the last unread entry.
>
> Deleting posts off the NNTP server does not delete it for people who have already received them, though. E.g., through the mailing list interface.  But at least it won't show up for "future" readers.
>
>
> T

Or people using the web interfaces.

On 11/28/2018 3:29 AM, Chris wrote:
> I sincerely hope you don't identify with the OP.

I did say it was controversial.


> Yesterday I was innocently thinking if and how LDC+Android could be integrated into Android Studio via CMake etc., but then it occurred to me that even if I / we succeeded in doing so, the D code itself might still break anytime, because of "more radical ideas". Maybe D should be rebranded as "Minefield".

There is a disconnect with not wanting radical new ideas, and wanting autodecode removed (which will result in silent breakage).

On Thursday, 29 November 2018 at 06:17:11 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
> On 11/28/2018 3:29 AM, Chris wrote:
>> I sincerely hope you don't identify with the OP.
>
> I did say it was controversial.

Funnily enough because they are too conservative, whereas D might have her refers to as "feature bloat". I'd call it overstretching.

>
>> Yesterday I was innocently thinking if and how LDC+Android could be integrated into Android Studio via CMake etc., but then it occurred to me that even if I / we succeeded in doing so, the D code itself might still break anytime, because of "more radical ideas". Maybe D should be rebranded as "Minefield".
>
> There is a disconnect with not wanting radical new ideas, and wanting autodecode removed (which will result in silent breakage).

You do realize that autodecode is an old flaw that has to go sooner or later. It negatively affects string handling performance, is not even correct and is a deal breaker in a world where string handling is omnipresent. So removing autodecode would benefit the language and the users in the long run and is both necessary and welcome. It's not a "new idea" you might want to try, it is strictly necessary, just like fixing the brakes of your car is not a "radical new idea", but necessary. And reasonable paths to fix it have been proposed.

However, coming up with "radical new ideas" about memory management and the like and making it a feature of the language that breaks valid existing code only to see what happens, is a baaaad idea. I'd suggest something like the "D labs" for it where you can test all those great new ideas and features for a minimum of one year. What if a feature turns out to be sh*it? What if you realize that partial constructors sound great, but you cannot have partial deconstructors? D should have a "laboratory branch" for this but not use users as guinea pigs.

On 11/29/2018 2:14 AM, Chris wrote:
> You do realize that autodecode is an old flaw that has to go sooner or later.

I'd remove autodecode tomorrow if I could wave the magic wand. The problem, though, as I point out to you again, is removing it will silently break a great deal of code.

You cannot have it be a deal-breaker both ways.

I'll also emphasize that you can avoid autodecode in your own projects by using .byChar. You are not forced to suffer its depredations in your own code.

On Thursday, 29 November 2018 at 10:14:37 UTC, Chris wrote:
>
> You do realize that autodecode is an old flaw that has to go sooner or later. It negatively affects string handling performance, is not even correct and is a deal breaker in a world where string handling is omnipresent.

Its a flaw but I wouldn't call it a deal breaker. If you want performance you will pay attention to details and you will see where autodecode happens and you can fix that.

Now Walter has asked you twice what are you proposing to do about autodecode that doesnt SILENTLY break existing code. Walter is a guy that doesnt like to be verbose and tries to express himself with as few words as possible. If we expand his one sentence we would get something like this.

I agree with you that autodecode is a problem and its a feature that appeared to be good on idea level. Now that its clear that it is a problem we thought hard on possible solutions to this problem and we didnt found satisfactory solution. Its possible that our limited brains could not have thought all possibilities and you might have a key to solving this problem once and for all so with that hope I ask you what are you proposing?

And to this you respond with

> And reasonable paths to fix it have been proposed.

What path? When proposed? Where can I read about them? And of those paths which one do you prefer? If you wrote one more vague statement like this a cute animal will die. Like this one https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=18-xvIjH8T4&t=20

> I'd suggest something like the "D labs" for it where you can test all those great new ideas and features for a minimum of one year.

You mean something like DIP? As a person who is so critical of everything you seem to know remarkably low on how D sausage is made. That came out wrong...

On Thursday, 29 November 2018 at 13:48:43 UTC, welkam wrote:
> On Thursday, 29 November 2018 at 10:14:37 UTC, Chris wrote:
>>
>> You do realize that autodecode is an old flaw that has to go sooner or later. It negatively affects string handling performance, is not even correct and is a deal breaker in a world where string handling is omnipresent.
>
> Its a flaw but I wouldn't call it a deal breaker. If you want performance you will pay attention to details and you will see where autodecode happens and you can fix that.
>
> Now Walter has asked you twice what are you proposing to do about autodecode that doesnt SILENTLY break existing code. Walter is a guy that doesnt like to be verbose and tries to express himself with as few words as possible. If we expand his one sentence we would get something like this.
>
> I agree with you that autodecode is a problem and its a feature that appeared to be good on idea level. Now that its clear that it is a problem we thought hard on possible solutions to this problem and we didnt found satisfactory solution. Its possible that our limited brains could not have thought all possibilities and you might have a key to solving this problem once and for all so with that hope I ask you what are you proposing?
>
> And to this you respond with
>
>> And reasonable paths to fix it have been proposed.
>
> What path? When proposed? Where can I read about them? And of those paths which one do you prefer? If you wrote one more vague statement like this a cute animal will die. Like this one https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=18-xvIjH8T4&t=20
>
>> I'd suggest something like the "D labs" for it where you can test all those great new ideas and features for a minimum of one year.
>
> You mean something like DIP? As a person who is so critical of everything you seem to know remarkably low on how D sausage is made. That came out wrong...

Haha! That's a good one, puts reddit to shame really.

Anyway back on topic...

I think deprecating the auto decoding free functions with a message to use `.byChar`, `.byDchar`,`.representation` etc. is really the _only_ practical way forward on this. Yes its slow but it won't cause any breakage. Certainly not silent breakage, deprecation being rather noisy.