What if someone suggests a block like “days since 2001”? What other reason should someone respond with about why that shouldn't be implemented.

(rethinking this, it kinda makes sense)
Ig really what we should consider is that the things that should be discouraged is full on no supports due to workarounds, however, stating the workarounds (when not stated before) shouldn't be, as that would be constructive (in the sense that 1. the existance of workarounds should still be considered and 2. so before the suggestion is implemented people have some way to do so)

k7e wrote:

What if someone suggests a block like “days since 2001”? What other reason should someone respond with about why that shouldn't be implemented.

This could instead be argued against as “too obscure” or “too similar to a pre-existing block to be useful”, which are both similar reasoning to workaround, but are more constructive and not usable in certain situations where “workaround” is not a valid argument against the topic

k7e wrote:

What if someone suggests a block like “days since 2001”? What other reason should someone respond with about why that shouldn't be implemented.

Honestly, instead of this

([days v] since 2000 :: sensing)

we should have this

([days v] since (2000) :: sensing)

I'm going to make another topic for this suggestion, I'll edit the link in when I've made it.

TerryLeeStudio wrote:

do you think this also falls there?

not really, there two completely different things

Even the Official List of Rejected Suggestions points out some of the easy workarounds. Sometime they really are just a lot easier.

yadayadayadagoodbye wrote:

k7e wrote:

What if someone suggests a block like “days since 2001”? What other reason should someone respond with about why that shouldn't be implemented.

This could instead be argued against as “too obscure” or “too similar to a pre-existing block to be useful”, which are both similar reasoning to workaround, but are more constructive and not usable in certain situations where “workaround” is not a valid argument against the topic

I don't understand how a “days since 2001” block is any more obscure than a “days since 2000” block, and saying “too similar” is basically the same thing as saying “there is an easy workaround”.