> On 14 Sep 2017, at 20:10, Ben Rimmington <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> On 14 Sep 2017, at 15:31, Haravikk wrote: >> >>> On 14 Sep 2017, at 02:12, Xiaodi Wu wrote: >>> >>>> On Wed, Sep 13, 2017 at 09:13 Haravikk wrote: >>>> >>>> I mean because not once have you summarised what these alleged >>>> "considerations" were; if they exist then you should be able do so, yet >>>> all I am hearing is "it was considered", which frankly is not an argument >>>> at all as it is entirely without substance. >>> >>> Of course it is not an argument at all. It is a factual statement. The >>> objections which you mentioned were also mentioned prior to a decision >>> about SE-0185. The community and the core team had an opportunity to view >>> those objections. After that time, a decision was made, having considered >>> all the stated pros and cons which included the ones that you are now >>> repeating. What "considerations" are you looking for? >> >> Ones with proof that they were ever made! Once again you are stating that >> these issues were "considered", yet you show not a single shred of proof >> that that was the case. You're asking me to take you at your word but I have >> no reason to trust that the problem has been as carefully considered as you >> claim. >> I was involved in one such discussion and the response from the core team >> was frankly pitiful; they did not provide any justification whatsoever. > > Chris Lattner already said that the core team discussed your concerns: > > <https://lists.swift.org/pipermail/swift-evolution/Week-of-Mon-20170814/038854.html> > > <https://lists.swift.org/pipermail/swift-evolution/Week-of-Mon-20170814/038883.html> > > The original idea was for most types to be *implicitly* equatable and > hashable: > > <https://lists.swift.org/pipermail/swift-evolution/Week-of-Mon-20160307/012099.html> > > The accepted proposal, with *explicit* declaration of conformance, is a good > compromise. > > Instead of discussing hypothetical issues with SE-0185, we can wait for Swift > 4.1 beta.
And as I pointed out this "consideration" was pathetic; he interjected once with a flawed argument and was never seen again. The core team has utterly failed to justify their decision. It does not prove "consideration"; there are no reasoned points, alternatives are never discussed, it is a dictate not a discussion. But fuck it, I no longer care; it is clear to me now that Swift Evolution serves no purpose if the core team cannot or will not listen, and on that basis if I cannot trust the core team I cannot trust Swift as a language, and will not be using it going forward, as the direction it is taking frankly undermines any optimism I once had for it. _______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list [email protected] https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution
