On Saturday, 18 July 2015 at 02:45:54 UTC, Laeeth Isharc wrote:
On Friday, 17 July 2015 at 12:06:08 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad
wrote:
For what domain is D the best choice?
You are switching the question without recognizing this - some
kind of fallacy of composition.
There is no fallacy here.
You cannot compete until you have something that is the best
possible starting point for a range of commercially- or
community-backed frameworks.
You don't have growth until you have clearly increasing presence
on Github and StackOverflow.
time and location. There aren't only a few sensible choices
for hedge fund data processing generally. It's a big world,
and there are many more variations between the needs of
different teams than it is possible to imagine.
Large scale batch-processing cannot drive adoption. Specialized
solutions like Chapel and C++/extensions will take the
batch-throughput market.
The work of Austrian economists on entrepreneurship demonstrate
that it simply is not possible to know which people will use a
product and how. The future is unknown, if not unimaginable.
It isn't. The historical success-stories within the domain of
programming languages are pretty clear.
The bigger picture is not D in a death match with any
identifiable languages.
All languages are on a long-tail death match against all the
other languages. History is pretty clear on that too.
It is long-tail because legacy source code bases will keep the
languages alive until the product is replaced.
If you presume programmer productivity is the only thing that
matters and treat efficiency like a free resource, it's a dead
cert that at some point efficiency will no longer be free.
More and more problems are solved by less and less efficiency.
Development time, reliability, maintainability, evolution and
perceived responsiveness are the most important factors.
In the 80s lots of software was close to theoretical throughput.
Today, almost no software is anywhere close, because it is waaaay
too expensive in terms of developer time as code base sizes
increase.
D's primary selling point is that it is more familiar to C++
programmers than Rust. But there are other C++-like languages
that are getting to the same technical quality (thanks to LLVM).
probably at that point, and that Facebook's experience with
tradeoffs is not an edge case, but a leading edge for what more
people will experience in future.
No, in the future the processor will be integrated with RAM.
You'll have lots and lots and lots of local processing power. The
bottleneck will be communication between compute-nodes. (It
already is, in many settings.)
Furthermore, just rhetorically, gentle and constructive
suggestions for improvement that come from within are likely to
D has a chance to gain adoption by picking a direction and
focusing on improving the process. But it is a long road, that
also requires some cleanup of language.
