On 13-01-06 11:40 AM, Leandro Lucarella wrote:
Pierre Rouleau, el 4 de January a las 11:59 me escribiste:
On 13-01-04 3:45 AM, Walter Bright wrote:
On 1/4/2013 12:16 AM, eles wrote:
Two concrete examples:
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5992
is described in the list as: " Phobos Win64 - D2 "; At least, change
its title
to something more human, like "Win64 alpha has been released with working
Phobos." (yes, that's exactly Don's comment, but at the end of the
discussion).
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5269
is described as: "version(assert)". Only if you read the discussion you
understand that "version(unittest) that allows setup code for assertions
to run when assertions are enabled and be compiled out when assertions
are
disabled" was implemented.
It is very different thing to see "version(assert)" and reading a
meaningful
description of it...
I understand and agree. And, as I posted previously, anyone can fix the
issue titles. I've already fixed a few.
Don't you think a process that requires reviewing these titles
*before* the actual software release announcement posting would
help?
Yeah, that's another issue too. Having mutating "release notes" is awful
and a PR disaster. Users only see the changelog once, assuming is
immutable, because one thinks that releases are immutable and complete
(those are very fundamental properties of a release, otherwise is a
preview or a snapshot).
That's another thing that I think is important to address eventually.
Currently, from the outside, I get the impression that the D language is
a great language but a language for its developers only. Although it
might be OK while the language is in its infancy, I would hope that D(2)
would come out of that state now that several books exist, that the
standard library seems in pretty good shape, that several other
libraries, frameworks and tools exist. To me, what seems missing is
some wrapper around all of this that would make D(2) much more
attractive for organizations like the one I work for. I am personally
very interested in D(2) and have already done discussions inside my work
place, but without that sort of visible infrastructure I doubt I would
be able to convince anyone to adopt D(2) for any product-based
development (and even for some internal tools).
So, again, this is why I was asking whether you guys thought it would be
a good idea for me to start a discussion somewhere in one of the D
mailing lists, to gather the list of new features planned for the future
(unless something like that already exists, but I did not find it) and
get something going to create a running list.
--
/Pierre Rouleau
