Don't think so.

They won't be able to prevent the language from being run into the ground by SIP/SLIP/SPP committees.

Anyway, getting told that I'm not qualified to tell people that their new language extension ideas tick all the boxes of "bad ideas that we are regretting and deprecating since years" after I have more or less managed deprecations and removals for four major versions of Scala ... I guess they need to find someone else to do my job now.

But given past experience, the people who are eager to add more and more features are seldomly the people who clean up after themselves.

Most upcoming language proposals have extremely poor quality, ignore years of lessons learned, repeat many mistakes of the past, reinvent things that have been tried without success elsewhere and have no respect for design principles that made Scala great.

So glad that my name won't be associated with this.

Well, will be interesting to see how Dotty plays out.

DOT may have been proven sound, but compilers are complex beasts; implementing DOT while preserving an upgrade path for Scala will likely be both difficult and limiting (since Dotty will inevitably be shackled by Scala's past).

For now we've got Scala though, in a couple of years maybe Dotty.

Dotty will inevitably implement the same features with the same fundamental issues. This is not about some old stuff we all regret having in Scala, this is about new low-quality proposals. When they get rubberstamped, they will end up in both Scala and Dotty.