Skip to main content
replaced http://stackoverflow.com/ with https://stackoverflow.com/
Source Link

Yes, to a small extent you have misunderstood. I saw this appear in the re-open queue and spent quite a while working out why it was closed before voting for it to remain that way.

The reason for the closure is explained pretty well in Alexei Levenkov's upvoted commentupvoted comment (my emphasis):

KenKin I vote to close and removing my guess answer why it was done that way. Unless Eric Lippert decides that your question is insanely interesting you have more or less no chance to dig inner reasons of "why". My guess is "no explicit demand for feature and works", but it is just that - guess.

I don't know that I can say it better than that. Unless the designer of the language passes by and decides to answer your question any answer will be a guess, and therefore not very useful for the future. He might, he's a Stack Overflow userStack Overflow user but it doesn't seem likely. If he'd like to answer it he can always flag your question for moderator attention to get it reopened.

To go over the points in the close reason; as the question is not answerable by the wider community they cannot supply facts, references or specific expertise. They will instead have to rely on guesswork and discussion.

Yes, to a small extent you have misunderstood. I saw this appear in the re-open queue and spent quite a while working out why it was closed before voting for it to remain that way.

The reason for the closure is explained pretty well in Alexei Levenkov's upvoted comment (my emphasis):

KenKin I vote to close and removing my guess answer why it was done that way. Unless Eric Lippert decides that your question is insanely interesting you have more or less no chance to dig inner reasons of "why". My guess is "no explicit demand for feature and works", but it is just that - guess.

I don't know that I can say it better than that. Unless the designer of the language passes by and decides to answer your question any answer will be a guess, and therefore not very useful for the future. He might, he's a Stack Overflow user but it doesn't seem likely. If he'd like to answer it he can always flag your question for moderator attention to get it reopened.

To go over the points in the close reason; as the question is not answerable by the wider community they cannot supply facts, references or specific expertise. They will instead have to rely on guesswork and discussion.

Yes, to a small extent you have misunderstood. I saw this appear in the re-open queue and spent quite a while working out why it was closed before voting for it to remain that way.

The reason for the closure is explained pretty well in Alexei Levenkov's upvoted comment (my emphasis):

KenKin I vote to close and removing my guess answer why it was done that way. Unless Eric Lippert decides that your question is insanely interesting you have more or less no chance to dig inner reasons of "why". My guess is "no explicit demand for feature and works", but it is just that - guess.

I don't know that I can say it better than that. Unless the designer of the language passes by and decides to answer your question any answer will be a guess, and therefore not very useful for the future. He might, he's a Stack Overflow user but it doesn't seem likely. If he'd like to answer it he can always flag your question for moderator attention to get it reopened.

To go over the points in the close reason; as the question is not answerable by the wider community they cannot supply facts, references or specific expertise. They will instead have to rely on guesswork and discussion.

Source Link
ben is uǝq backwards
  • 39.7k
  • 15
  • 88
  • 177

Yes, to a small extent you have misunderstood. I saw this appear in the re-open queue and spent quite a while working out why it was closed before voting for it to remain that way.

The reason for the closure is explained pretty well in Alexei Levenkov's upvoted comment (my emphasis):

KenKin I vote to close and removing my guess answer why it was done that way. Unless Eric Lippert decides that your question is insanely interesting you have more or less no chance to dig inner reasons of "why". My guess is "no explicit demand for feature and works", but it is just that - guess.

I don't know that I can say it better than that. Unless the designer of the language passes by and decides to answer your question any answer will be a guess, and therefore not very useful for the future. He might, he's a Stack Overflow user but it doesn't seem likely. If he'd like to answer it he can always flag your question for moderator attention to get it reopened.

To go over the points in the close reason; as the question is not answerable by the wider community they cannot supply facts, references or specific expertise. They will instead have to rely on guesswork and discussion.