On Tuesday, 26 January 2016 at 21:50:58 UTC, Igor wrote:
I think the leaders are in over their heads. They have no real
vision or plan to make D the language it can be. They are
satisfied with their niche in the programming world.
The vision statement says this:
«Safety is a primary concern of all work, especially work
involving early memory reclamation (below). Our main challenge
for H1 2016 is to create a combination of language and library
support for @safe reference counting. We would also hopefully
support ownership patterns such as uniqueness with borrowing.»
And this:
«"No GC" is a primary concern going forward for the standard
library and client code.
We need good language+library support and robust idioms to follow
for good no-GC code.»
These are very weak statements, and there are no estimates. So
what does it mean? Planning in H1, design in H2, implementation
after that and production ready in 2-10 years? If so, why put it
in H1? What is the ETA?
:-/
If I said this stuff in North Korea I'd be hung!
There is quite a bit of whipping and screaming around here, but I
have yet to see a hanging.
