retard Wrote: > What annoys me the most in pro D articles is the author usually tries to > prove (in a naive way) that despite all the deficiencies the language and > tool chain bla blah blah
This guy has nothing better to do? Sheesh.. > For instance, I'm starting the implementation of a 64-bit systems/ > application programming project *now*. The implementation phase will last > N months (assume optimistic waterfall process model here). How many weeks/ > months must the N at least be to make D a feasible option? D has everything you need and rest are available via C bindings. You can start your product now. Use DMD for 32-bit code, LDC/GDC for 64-bit. Problem solved. The N is zero. Even hello world is usually simpler in D. > A typical lead developer / project manager has to make decisions based on > some assumptions. E.g. > > Platform Implementation Developer Performance Platform > Time Market Index Risk factor > -------------------------------------------------------------- > C/x64 Linux 12 months good 100 medium > C++/x64 Linux 10 months ok 110 high > Java/x64 JVM 8 months excellent 80 low > C#/Windows 64 7 months very good 85 low > Python/Linux 4-5 months very good 30 low > D 12+ months? very bad 80-115 ? very high The numbers for D are 5-6 months (almost as good as python), very good (lots of unemployed students reading this newsgroup), 90-150 (D was #1 in the language shootout but the guy got jealous). Risks are very low because everyone knows C and D is almost compatible with C if you can't handle object oriented meta programming code. > Why I think the D platform's risk is so high is because the author > constantly refuses to give ANY estimates on feature schedules. There's no > up-to-date roadmap anywhere. The bugzilla voting system doesn't work. > Lots of production ready core functionality is missing (for example how > long has d2 distribution had a commercial quality xml framework?) 64-bit DMD, world fastest stdlib (Phobos 2), other libraries, D3, world domination ---> > For example gcc has had 64-bit C/C++ support quite long. But it took > several years to stabilize. The implementation of a 64-bit X-ray machine > firmware in D cannot begin one week after 64-bit DMD is announced. We don't need X-ray machines. There is a lot of work replacing all C/C++ apps with D code. You know, solitaire.exe, notepad.exe, things like that. Much better when done in D. - G.W.
