On Friday, 16 June 2017 at 10:38:44 UTC, Seb wrote:
There is an official D installer for Posix systems that can
handle multiple compilers and all versions quite well.
IIRC does dvm only support DMD?
Good for the poxis platform set ... but D is used on more then
only linux and osx.
I think you are just complaining about Windows. Everything is
nicely packaged under Linux, Posix and OSX.
And that makes the point wrong? No it does not ...
The beauty of D is that you don't need a fancy editor.
That is a straw man argument...
Every language can be more productive with a editor, especially
when people first learn the language. Lets not turn this into a
editor/ide vs ... discussion. You got your preference, that is
clear by now.
Really?
curl i.dlang.io | bash -s dmd
curl i.dlang.io | bash -s dmd-2.072.2
curl i.dlang.io | bash -s dmd-newCTFE
curl i.dlang.io | bash -s dmd-nightly
curl i.dlang.io | bash -s ldc
curl i.dlang.io | bash -s ldc-beta
curl i.dlang.io | bash -s ldc-1.1.0
curl i.dlang.io | bash -s gdc
Thanks but again besides the point. The Original poster is
referring to the experience for new users.
Do you expect every user to know Linux commands? Do you expect
them to run Linux?
The fact that your over emphasizing on this, clearly shows that
there is a gap in D there multi-platform support.
Thanks for the information. Its useful for me but that is NOT THE
POINT!
Are there any features between 2.073.2 (latest LDC beta) and
2.074.1 that you actually miss?
Up to recently Dmd and Ldc used to be much more separated in
there future set.
And please do tell ... having 2.073.2 vs 2.074.1 version
difference may not be a lot but its still not a single platform
support.
Bugs or issues solved in DMD 2.074.1 can hamper somebody who is
cross compiling for production. And visa versa.
Is it that difficult to have both versions synchronized and
released as one package? Why the push back to even mentioning
this.
--compiler=ldc2 works very well for me.
Nice to know, yet, that did not work in my case and it needed the
path.
Because the top contributors to DMD are unfamiliar with the LDC
codebase. However, there are ongoing efforts to make the
frontend accessible as a library.
Good to know...
Because there is a very easy way to fetch & build them since
DUB is part of the release:
dub fetch dscanner
dub build dscanner
Again, this is straw man argumentation.
This assumes knowledge of dub, knowledge of the tools used, it
assume the editor can interact and find the builds. And frankly,
running it like that also pollutes a project ( seen it, done it,
got the medal ).
Read the freaking original poster his text. He is frustrated that
for new users, maybe people with little to no background D is
simply a mess.
I pointed out that Rust and Go are WAY more easy to setup
everything and interact with advanced features because they
integrated a lot more.
And on a side note: There is nothing more fun as running into a
bug with dfmt or some other third party plugin because a change
that happened in dmd.
Example: latest DMD, a change happened, plugin does not compile.
Now please do tell how a totally new user will find his way
around? They will post here, get some crispy comment and maybe
leave. Or hell, they may not even post here.
Don't forget that D is an open source project driven by
volunteers.
So do you and every other person remind the people who point out
issues. And the point is? Well, its all volunteer project so
never expect a improvement until somebody wants to fix it.
Strange because Rust is highly volunteer based and yet they have
a more coherent structure. So why is that? Now that is a good
question...
Because there's only so much that can be in a standard
library. It's way to thick imho anyways. What's wrong with
using a DUB package?
What i am talking about is not part of the standard library,
hell, it has nothing to do with the library at all. Its part of
the standard tool set. Total different things...
If it is that common to your work, you can add the project to
you D include directory.
Again ... very, VERY unclear how and what is possible in D. Sure,
i can figure it things out but it takes time. And the next guy
also needs to put time into this. And the next guy...
Yes because tools come and go whereas a standard library or a
package manager stays. With the limited volunteers time there's
only so much that can be done.
And in your free time, you usually work on problems that are
interesting to you?
Maybe that is the same reason why D has a issue drawing in new
non-C/C++ developers? Maybe because too many people live in there
high tower assuming its easy for everybody else.
And no offense but some responses here feel like: "Hey somebody
pointed out a problem. Lets jump on this person for pointing it
out".
I am already seeing the arguments that D is all about volunteers
and the push back. "Hey, D is all volunteers. Why do you not do
it. Well, if you do not do it, it will never happen". And round
and round that discussion goes.
On Friday, 16 June 2017 at 10:55:04 UTC, Moritz Maxeiner wrote:
Everything *I* need works well enough (and I'm fairly convinced
it is the same for the majority of D users, though that is
speculation). If you want something fixed, do it yourself or
pay someone to do it.
Well, i do not have the time. Want me to donate? Does that solve
the issue. No ... because there is no clear infrastructure in
place to actually hire people to work on the language and the
environment.
Pointless to even mention this, it like all the other discussions
like this. People mention issue. Blow back. Heated discussions.
And the people who complain give up. Those that point fingers
continue living in there bubble and ... nothing changes or
improves.
I do not have a issue donating money. In the process of setting
up a company and maybe can support D from that angle. But i do
have a issue when people react like this whenever people with
good intention get blow back. The original poster his topic title
is a bad choice but his points are not. Just reading the history
on the mail group and you see so many time the same issues. And
the exact same responses. And the exact same nothing happening
because people give up.
D for me works but i like to see D also grow. When D grows, it
means the language will get longer support. A bigger community is
more resources. Win win for everybody. But for some reason i can
not help to feel that some people are almost against this, the
attitude here simply STINKS when it comes down to issues. The
whole "it works for me, so how dare you complain" is really
demotivating and frankly scares people away.
Hey, it works for me "not dumb dumb" but its the wast of time
figuring out things that are much more easy in other languages.
But that also means anybody coming with limited programming
knowledge or no linux knowledge and wants to do more then a
"hello world", will run into the exact time wasting issues.
But please, do shoot the messengers. Like that will help.
I am already far into my project with D but at the same time i
can not help getting this nagging feeling that D has major issues
beyond its base language. Mostly its community and structure. I
see less of this with for instance Rust despite being a WAY
younger language and audience. Its almost like D is stuck in the
past, in some kind of pre-2000 C++ attitude. Like i said, maybe
its me. D as a base language works but for such a old language (
lets be honest about that ), its a real struggle on the other
areas beyond the language.
