For further consideration...
david.goodenough at linkchoose.co.uk
Mon Mar 30 13:51:23 PDT 2009
On Monday 30 March 2009, Bob Lee wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 11:50 AM, David Goodenough <
> david.goodenough at linkchoose.co.uk> wrote:
> > I think that questions of controversy seem to be being used as a smoke
> > screen to block sensible discussion of something which is genuinely
> > needed.
> I think we need a comprehensive solution that doesn't depend so heavily on
> reflection, if anything. A Coin proposal needs to be small, but it also
> needs to be a good, tasteful, generally useful solution, and it shouldn't
> preclude future better solutions. I'm sorry, but I read through your
> proposal and didn't find it very attractive in general, so I'm not
> interested in debating it point by point.
By that arguement we never do anything because any solution will
never be perfect. If the full solution is not available I would rather have
a half way house that fulfills my need than wait indefinitely (and I call
5 years as near to indefinitely as matters). I need compiler checkability
for field references now.
More information about the coin-dev