• Mike Parker (14/14) Apr 13 2022 Walter and Atila have informed me that they have approved DIP
• zjh (11/17) Apr 13 2022 `...` is Orthogonal to 'foreach'!
• ag0aep6g (2/10) Apr 13 2022 Sweet. Thank you, Dennis and Paul.
• Steven Schveighoffer (4/19) Apr 13 2022 Damn, that's unfortunate. I really wanted that one to go through...
• Dukc (6/10) Apr 14 2022 Yes. Despite my slight opposition to the DIP in the final review

Mike Parker <aldacron gmail.com> writes:

Walter and Atila have informed me that they have approved DIP 
1035, " system Variables", on the grounds that it identifies a 
loophole in the ` safe` checks and provides a reasonable 
solution. Walter said it's a good DIP.

https://github.com/dlang/DIPs/blob/master/DIPs/accepted/DIP1035.md

Congratulations to Dennis Korpel and Paul Backus.

I've marked DIP 1037, "Add Unary Operator ...", as "Abandoned". 
As an abandoned DIP, it has been removed from the review queue 
and is now free for anyone to champion it who is so inclined. The 
original author is also free to come back to it at any time.

https://github.com/dlang/DIPs/blob/master/DIPs/other/DIP1037.md

If you would like to take on DIP 1037, or any abandoned DIP, 
please contact social dlang.org and we'll discuss the necessary 
steps.

zjh <fqbqrr 163.com> writes:

On Wednesday, 13 April 2022 at 07:32:26 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
 Walter and Atila have informed me that they have approved DIP 
 1035, " system Variables", on the grounds that it identifies a 
 loophole in the ` safe` checks and provides a reasonable 
 solution. Walter said it's a good DIP.

 https://github.com/dlang/DIPs/blob/master/DIPs/accepted/DIP1035.md

 Congratulations to Dennis Korpel and Paul Backus.

`...` is Orthogonal to 'foreach'!

`...` is very convenient,
Basically, any of my `C++` functions have it.

op: +, -, *, /, %, ^, &, |, <<, >>,
=, +=, -=, *=, /=, %=, ^=, &=, |=, <<=, >>=,
<, >, <=, >=, ==, !=,
&&, ||,.*, ->* ,...

C++ supports various `unary and binary` folding expressions.
Coupled with `variable parameters`, it is very convenient
.

ag0aep6g <anonymous example.com> writes:

On 13.04.22 09:32, Mike Parker wrote:
 Walter and Atila have informed me that they have approved DIP 1035, 
 " system Variables", on the grounds that it identifies a loophole in the 
 ` safe` checks and provides a reasonable solution. Walter said it's a 
 good DIP.
 
 https://github.com/dlang/DIPs/blob/master/DIPs/accepted/DIP1035.md
 
 Congratulations to Dennis Korpel and Paul Backus.

Sweet. Thank you, Dennis and Paul.

Steven Schveighoffer <schveiguy gmail.com> writes:

On 4/13/22 3:32 AM, Mike Parker wrote:
 Walter and Atila have informed me that they have approved DIP 1035, 
 " system Variables", on the grounds that it identifies a loophole in the 
 ` safe` checks and provides a reasonable solution. Walter said it's a 
 good DIP.
 
 https://github.com/dlang/DIPs/blob/master/DIPs/accepted/DIP1035.md
 
 Congratulations to Dennis Korpel and Paul Backus.

Awesome! Very much looking forward to that.

 
 I've marked DIP 1037, "Add Unary Operator ...", as "Abandoned". As an 
 abandoned DIP, it has been removed from the review queue and is now free 
 for anyone to champion it who is so inclined. The original author is 
 also free to come back to it at any time.
 
 https://github.com/dlang/DIPs/blob/master/DIPs/other/DIP1037.md

Damn, that's unfortunate. I really wanted that one to go through...

-Steve

Dukc <ajieskola gmail.com> writes:

On Wednesday, 13 April 2022 at 07:32:26 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
 Walter and Atila have informed me that they have approved DIP 
 1035, " system Variables", on the grounds that it identifies a 
 loophole in the ` safe` checks and provides a reasonable 
 solution. Walter said it's a good DIP.

Yes. Despite my slight opposition to the DIP in the final review 
I can't say I'm disappointed. The DIP is still such a piece of 
art and the feature sounds nice to use, only a bit redundant 
(which is why I opposed it). Redundancy is not a showstopper 
after all.