On Wednesday, 9 August 2017 at 22:17:42 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
On Wednesday, August 09, 2017 17:13:37 Timon Gehr via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
It is also a common pattern for the complainers to point out
how not fixing their pet peeve will result in negative PR or
reduced popularity. As if everyone here was somehow more
deeply invested in D's popularity than in its quality. I find
that to be a bit irritating.
If anything, most of us are more invested in its quality than
its popularity. Those of us who spend our time contributing to
the code base or writing our personal projects in D care a
great deal about its quality, and while we may care about how
popular it is, that obviously wasn't what brought us here.
Having D popular would be nice, but it's not necessary for us
to be doing what we've been doing. And the reality of the
matter is that most of us don't have the proper skillset for
improving D's popularity. We're engineers, not marketing people.
If someone has an issue that prevents them from using D, then
that matters, but it needs to be taken in the context of
everything else, and honestly, if doing something to make the
language more popular means reducing its quality, I'd rather
that it have higher quality. Ideally, having higher quality
would help improve its popularity, but unfortunately, things
don't always work that way.
Regardless, we're here because we want a quality language, not
because we want a popular one. We just hope that those two
things aren't mutually exclusive.
- Jonathan M Davis
i agree about quality part, but you mix two things, popularity
and the need of tooling
the point of my post was to gather community in hope for better
tooling, not popularity
having great tooling might increase popularity, but for me it'll
improve my productivity, and that's all i care about, popularity
is next, quality is already nice for me
