> It would have been interesting to get some more feedback on why people
> voted No - some took part in the discussion, but most didn't.
Indeed... Of those who did, I have retained the following arguments
(sorry in advance for any omission, approximation or
misinterpretation):
- no impact analy
The vote has been closed, the RFC has been declined with 14 to 3 votes.
It would have been interesting to get some more feedback on why people
voted No - some took part in the discussion, but most didn't. My
assumption is that most didn't find this important enough, especially if
strict types is
