This is just so reminiscent of the Python 2 / Python 3 fiasco. Python 3 was clearly an improvement over Python 2, but the way in which the changes came to the community caused a violent split. Even after many years, there are those for whom Python 3 is anathema and not to be used.
The Python community has now moved on, and the Python 3 haters are just left to their own devices. If they want to come to the community they have to be accepting that Python 3 is the mainline and not try to undermine that. The Python community is the most diverse and welcoming community of all the programming communities I have ever been involved with. The 2/3 war is over, 3 is the one true way. Until 4 is released. On Sat, 2018-09-22 at 14:31 +0000, Jonathan Marler via Digitalmars-d wrote: > On Saturday, 22 September 2018 at 13:25:27 UTC, rikki cattermole > wrote: > > Then D isn't the right choice for you. > > I think it makes for a better community if we can be more > welcoming, helpful a gracious instead of responding to criticism > this way. This is someone who saw enough potential with D to end > up on the forums but had some gripes with it, after all who > doesn't? I'm glad he took the initiative to provide us with good > feedback, and he's not the first to take issue with the > inconsistent '@' attribute syntax. I'm sure everyone can agree > this inconsistency is less than ideal but that doesn't mean D > isn't right for them and we should respond this feedback like > this with thanks rather than dismissal. Someone did say, Use D 2 but without the cruft and it looks and feels like D1. That seems like a constructive suggestion. Perhaps D 2 can be improved by getting rid of the cruft and saying backward compatibility is seriously over-rated. -- Russel. =========================================== Dr Russel Winder t: +44 20 7585 2200 41 Buckmaster Road m: +44 7770 465 077 London SW11 1EN, UK w: www.russel.org.uk
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
