On 1/17/12 4:52 AM, Walter Bright wrote:
On 1/17/2012 2:07 AM, Gour wrote:
My example was just meant to show what might be the result when one
feels that developers are not behind their product in a sense that one
'cannot count on the project' which was supposed to be continuation on
my "we always get the feedback it's not safe investment of our time&
energy and it would be better to use something else, either C(++), Java,
Scala, Python etc."
So, I highly admire the work of all members within D community giving
something valuable for free, but being interested in success of D, I
wanted to share my experience I have when trying to advocate using of D
for real (open-source) projects *today*.
I'll try to be more sensitive next time...
I'm not taking issue with sensitivity, just that one is *less* likely to
get responsive bug fixes from Major Software Vendor, and so dismissing D
for that reason is invalid.
I've seen people say "D doesn't have feature X, so I'm going to use
language B." But B doesn't have feature X, either. Again, the reason
given is invalid.
This is often mentioned, so I, too, thought about it a fair amount. I
think it would be hasty to simplify that judgment.
I think the reasoning goes like this:
1. D lacks feature X that is often needed during the use of language B,
which lacks it too.
2. The person reasons they'll see advantage in switching to a language
if it did have X.
3. D doesn't, so the proposition of making the effort to switch from B
is less appealing.
Similar lines of thinking may go about features that B has and D
doesn't, or about features that both B and D have but D implements them
poorly, or about promising differentiating features that D has that
don't work reliably.
Andrei
