On 09/15/2011 01:21 AM, Don wrote:
On 15.09.2011 03:29, Jeff Nowakowski wrote:
On 09/14/2011 08:36 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
Well, the problem here is that you mix an argument and its negation
in an illogical way. You simultaneously assume that Tiobe got D's
position wrong at #20 and Scala's position correctly at #50.
Yet you keep on ignoring the obvious reason why D's stats are so wrong.
I didn't "assume" it, I gave obvious reasons for it.
Wonder why you took that out on me and others. One thing I try to do is
not get in the position of saying things that I'm sorry about later on.
Considering that Tiobe has a bad reputation which has been mentioned
both on this board and on reddit multiple times, and both bearophile and
Don had reservations about the Tiobe "news", I think I have some
justification in saying should have shown some restraint in touting
Tiobe.
My take on this: Tiobe stats are of doubtful merit. They have a very
large month-to-month noise component, and it's not even clear what
they're measuring. But their headline for the month was about D. This is
good publicity for us.
At the same time, D has achieved a much greater level of maturity.
I suspect the correlation between the two is very weak. But it doesn't
really matter. We should regard the Tiobe thing as free marketing,
rather than an indicator of how well we're doing.
The best indicator of how we're doing is how many active contributors we
have. A high web profile only matters insofar as it attracts
contributors. And I think that's true for any language which is not
mainstream. Only once you have a very mature product, and you're
competing for market share, do Tiobe-style metrics matter.
BTW "Go" must also have terrible quality statistics on Tiobe.
Shut up and go programming! :o)
Andrei
