>>> I must say it seems a little strange for me given current stream of >>> "because we can" syntax additions proposed to reject something that has >>> been asked for by real people for years just because sometime in the >>> future we might or might not have something that may do a similar thing >>> in different way. >> >> I would not agree with your argument that it should be introduced because it >> is requested by real people for years and it is simple to add. Isn't that >> pretty much the same as "because we can"? > > No, it is pretty much the opposite. It is "because people need it".
lolwut, you're kidding right? So you listed a bunch of StackOverflow questions asking for this and from this concluded that this is a feature "people need" whereas the RFCs by ircmaxell/me (whichever you mean) are not needed and are proposed just "because we can" and are not needed by "real people"? Would you like RFC's to include detailed chat logs, Twitter mentions and Reddit conversations as proof that features are wanted by "real people"? Nikita
