On Thursday, 29 January 2015 at 10:50:49 UTC, ponce wrote:
In the Mythical Man Month, Brooks advises for a single person
responsible for architecture, or a dynamic duo (this is exactly
what we are with Walter and Andrei).
You mean like Batman?
I don't feel like discussing system development principles with
you if you think the "dynamic duo" is anywhere near following
sound software engineering principles. It is not a fun topic to
teach (yes, I have done that).
This role was rediscovered as "product owner" in Agile settings.
Strong leadership and saying "no" more often that people would
like is a constant among good projects.
The only thing that truly matters is that you have a plan and a
reasonable process to back it up. Leadership is about
facilitating the process.
A role is not a person, it is backing a task that to be fulfilled
to facilitate the process in a predictable and orderly fashion.
I also made D proposals back in the days and they were @crap
proposals (literally). You, personally, want syntax changes AND
feature freeze.
I personally don't think it is reasonable for Walter and Andrei
to present D as a tool that is suitable for production. If it is,
then they have to fess up to massive critique. Take a look at
dlang.org, where does it say "experimental language"? It used to
say "beta", which actually should have been "alpha"...
I personally only want D to follow sound engineering principles.
I personally don't want syntax changes or feature freeze, since
it won't help without a solid process to back it up.
Nobody would use a language whose leaders have said yes to the
ideas of the every abusive internet users out there.
I think it is abusive and dishonest to present a language as
ready for use when it nowhere near a stable release. I've
previously requested that they actually do language design by
writing up a spec for where D is heading, so that people can make
up their mind and decide to provide "implementation power" if
they like the presented outcome. Without a clear horizon, it
makes no sense to participate unless you have it as a hobby.
That slows down progress. That is what makes Rust and Go winners
and D a stagnation.
What I suggest is the best for D is:
1. Feature freeze.
2. Fix semantics/refactor compiler internals.
3. Fix syntax to be mainstream friendly.
In that order.
I have no hope that it will happen without a major restructuring
of the process. I'm totally with ketmar on that front.
