Re: Old but interesting link as to the low adoption reason for D
On Tuesday, 13 February 2018 at 09:11:44 UTC, ketmar wrote: because Business Developers wants it that way. they are... well... Doing Business, and they wants someone to maintain all the libraries they are using. for free, of course. and what can be better than to offload this burden to language developers? ... really? This is the attitude here. almost each time we hear about "D should have XXX in standard library", it comes either from Business Developer, The reason why people prefer official supported library functionality is because: * Your guaranteed that this will have maintainers. Unlike alternative unofficial solutions. * Guaranteed for a official stable API that will be similar across libraries. Cutting down on time for new developers to get familiar with the language. * Having a load of different Independent libraries that "do the same but not exactly the same" is simply bad practice. Case and point: https://code.dlang.org/search?q=mysql No official library, some are not supported, some are duplicates with minor changes, no official API or standard... can go on a long time. If your idea is that people need to sift past the junk each time and hope that the library they pick is still supported in 5 years, your dead wrong. It does not work like that in any business environment. If you want a language to be adopted beyond hobbyist, you need to offer more then simply a language. Languages are a dime a dozen, well supported languages with a thriving eco-system that is a different market. People seem to have it in their head that its a good thing to not have a lot of officially supported libraries. Well, from a business perspective it is simply not feasible to adopt a language, when it only offers, quote: "10% improvement", and the rest of the eco-system relies on those same (unpaid) people. People who one day can simply drop all support on packages. or from Business Developer in Disguise. 'cause they always want someone to work for 'em for free. I have no problem paying as do a lot of people but do you hand over your money to projects where to attitude does not align with yours? I put money in several projects only to see no good come from it. I learn from my business mistakes. Do i need a language that keeps pushing more advanced features while introducing regressions all the time. Or do i prefer a stable language with official supported libraries that is easy to learn for new employees and has no baggage holding it back. Pick one ... and guess what gets a language adopted by us. I noticed after reading topics how there is a very clear group of people, with a real motivation to maintain the status quo. They have found their language and use any excuse to not gain a mass market audience. Community attitude is just as important as the language. As a language D may been gaining exposure but if you dislike new people coming here and pointing out major and minor issues, then that exposure is useless and will only reinforce a negative image for the language. No point in putting time feeding trolls, time is money after all. Zhù nǐ hǎo yùn! Wish you luck!
Re: Old but interesting link as to the low adoption reason for D
On Monday, 12 February 2018 at 21:49:00 UTC, Craig Dillabaugh wrote: So what is your suggested course of action to correct this PR problem? I have provided several: * As stated the D its focusing the wrong group of developers * Too much old baggage and regressions because of it * Too much complexity from trying to focus on that specific group, who seem to see D as only 10% better and not worth the switch. * Clear issues in the library that people keep stumbling upon * Library issues * Lack of default OFFICIAL libraries like HTTP(s), database access, ... * Just a long list that is known for years. Very few with the resources are interested in actually fixing them and they prefer to focus upon BetterC. And discussions about DUB. What else can be said... And most of the points mentioned above require such a big change, its never going to happen. How to fix? It only gets fixed when the people above put forward a clear goal for the language. When that is lacking and people move at random like headless chickens with the end result?
Old but interesting link as to the low adoption reason for D
https://www.reddit.com/r/ProgrammingLanguages/comments/4etdnc/free_pascal_is_very_super_mega_ultra_underrated/ Ignore the part about Pascal and read the Post by matthieum: I have, for my company, been part of a group in charge of exploring the criteria for the inclusion of new languages in the company's set of supported languages. Here are some of the comments: Note that we already rejected D because we did not find it compelling enough. We are not looking for a 10% better language; given the cost of adding a language (as alluded above), which are much more linked to talent management than technological issues, a new language has to: either cover an area that is ill-covered today (we added Python in the last couple years for this, and Scala is being prototyped for BigData analysis) or bring a significant benefit it aims at displacing an existing language This is part of the issues that D faces. Especially that last sentence... "bring a significant benefit". And some other user his responds: D is now more of a research platform for Walter than anything else. Public image is very important ... Its not the first time stumbling on comments like this.
Re: Which language futures make D overcompicated?
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 23:01:44 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote: On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 20:49:24 UTC, Meta wrote: was a complicated language, 99 of them would say no. If you ask 100 Python programmers, 99 would probably say yes. Yes, but objectively speaking I'd say modern Python is more complicated than C++ and D. What Python got right is that you don't have to deal with the complicated stuff unless you are hellbent on dealing with it. Python affords a very smooth incremental learning curve, but it is still a long learning curve... ^ This ... I am seeing some responses that a language that is not loaded with all the options is not really real language. Yet, those languages are used for productivity all over the world. Go is horrible limited and yet loved by many. And many really push the boundaries very far. But why do Python, PHP, Ruby, Go and others rank so high. Its because they are designed with a easy learning curve and documentation to match this curve. D has the issue its designed to trow people into the deep end of the pool. Reading the responses on the basic nitpicking issues with D ( that i posted here ), you can tell that people "do not get it". Its small issues but a lot of small issues simply increase complexity. One mole in a garden is not a issue and can be overlooked. A hundred and people prefer the garden next door. D will never be a language that draws in a lot of people from scripting languages like Python, PHP, Ruby simply because its clearly not designed with this mindset. It also does not help how much strange code decisions have been made in the past, that result in awkward library issues. The problem is most languages allow you to program 80 to 90% of the task with eases. D is focused on providing those extra 10 a 20% but in doing so the language has gotten complex, the library filled with years of scruff and because it focused on that extra 20%, it only draws in a selective crowd that keeps pushing more and more into that boundary. And that same crowd is not focused on leaving C++ any time soon, as C++ keeps evolving and improving. Anybody really focused on going into this 20% market, will look at the players, the tools and simply say: "Why D? Why not C++ 14/17/20". This very much compact the issue that D has in attracting new users.
Re: Which language futures make D overcompicated?
Here are a few more "basics" that are unneeded or confusing. Lets not even talk about the more advanced features like inout, ... /-/ * auto: Static typed language yet we fall back on the compiler to figure out what is being assigned. Can just as well have a interpreter language. It only encourages lazy writing and has a penalty on the compilation. /-/ * to!string, to!... requires "import std.conv" * basic string manipulation requires "import std.string" * join, replace, replaceInPlace, split, empty all require std.array * ... ... these are basic language features, yet its required to included each of those libraries to every file you need it. A lot of languages have basic functions as standard or dynamically include the required code upon compilation ( or error if you have a double naming ). The time saved on auto compilation, can be reused to do the above mentioned. Two birds with one move. /-/ * splitLines vs split .. std.array vs std.string It confuses people because split is part of std.array but splitLines is part of std.string. Really! Most languages simply have split as a basic language feature and you indicate what you want to split. Its not the only confusing or double function that is present in the standard library. /-/ * scope() .. just call it "defer" just as every other language now does. It only confuses people who come from other languages. Its now almost a standard. By using scope people have have no clue that D has a defer. Took even me a while to know that D had a defer system in place. /-/ If you have a few more weeks, this list is long :) Unfortunately, because the code base it is impossible to fix these issues as too much code depends on it. The libraries, packages, ...
Re: Quora: Why hasn't D started to replace C++?
On Thursday, 8 February 2018 at 15:56:16 UTC, Martin Tschierschke wrote: You will get 9 packages listed. Which should I take? If you click on everyone, you will realize, that some of them are forks of other. And the version number of mysql-native at the top, just recently increased so strong, that it makes a different. The minimum additional information which should be listed - I think - is the number of downloads and GitHub stars. I know that there is work behind the scene to find some kind of weighted sort, this would be cool, but just displaying the GitHub voting might help a lot. The answer to that is simply pick: null. Two depend on vibe.d core. Several others have not been updated. As you stated several are forks. And not a single one is a official D supported package. For basic technology as database's: Mysql, PostgreSQL, Sqlite, Firebird, MongoDB you expect this to be under the standard library for D, with official support. The reason why scripting languages do good in user adaptation is simply because they offer all the necessary dependencies as official libraries. Any language that depends on 3th party developers to provide this support can never have a standardized structure and forces people into making choices they may regret. Add also a total lack of quality control. Extra fun: etc.c.sqlite3
Re: Quora: Why hasn't D started to replace C++?
On Thursday, 8 February 2018 at 03:36:17 UTC, Laeeth Isharc wrote: But really who is selling D to anyone? We are very far from that stage right now. Did someone sell D to Microsoft COM team, Remedy or to Weka? Nope. People who had earned the authority to decide became aware of the language end decided to use it. And they did so because for them it solved their particular problems better then anything else they could think of. The question one needs to ask is more: how long ago have those developers decided to use D and why is the technology not more widespread in those companies. If D solved the issues in those companies, you expect to see a increased switch to a language. And yet most of those companies use D in one project and it stays in that one project. That means other developers do not switch, management has no task to introduce it elsewhere and the project is more or less supported by the developer that pushed for the technology.
Re: [OT] Windows dying
For a dying platform as so many advocate here, it seems to be doing fairly well. Maybe i am too old but the whole dying platform gig has been doing all the way to Windows ME and Vista and 8 and ... The reality is, for any user that wants to be productive Windows is hard to beat. The only thing that comes close is the extreme hardware restrictive OSx from Apple. I do think that people here have a massive anti Microsoft bias by just reading the comments. Mobile will overtake PC for productivity? No ... simply no. Windows is dying? Hardly... Has the market changed because some users can use tablets, as they are not hardcore user but only want to simply browse and mail? Yes... There has been a shift there. But will Windows be out fazed on the corporate floor? No ... Will Windows be removed as a gaming platform and replaced by Linux / OSx? No ... While Linux and OSx can be used very well, both platforms share too many issues. OSx being hardware limited by design, as it makes testing more easy for Apple. Linux as a market that is so fragmented on the desktop level. At times people may want to appreciate the level of robustness that Windows is. Its easily as stable like Linux but has the support level for almost every piece of hardware. With the inclusion of WSL ( guess what i use D on because, well, i do not want to install VS! ), it combines both world. Maybe for some people the reason why they are being so annoying and frankly rude, is there own bias is getting in the way of the message. Its not because a person wants to write D code, that they want to install a multi GIGABYTE installation just so they can compile 64bit programs. Same with the comments that come down to "i do not see a reason why you want 64bit on Windows", is not a good excuse. On Wednesday, 1 November 2017 at 09:24:57 UTC, Joakim wrote: I don't propose ignoring it, but I suggest not to invest too much more into it, like all the work it would take to get VS or other Windows IDE support up to the level where Windows devs seem to want. Its just shows a pure vileness to Windows users as "We do not care to fix issues on your platform, use our platform or install VS and have it bit rote on your hard drive for no reason beyond we simply do not want to support Windows on D". No wonder some people think that Windows is a second tier citizen in the D community. It sure as hell does not feel very welcoming reading this thread. When a person has a issue, the response seem to be very aggressive attacking that person and the platform but ignoring the actual issue. How many people posted here claiming that he wanted to have 64bit removed, when it was NOT what he wrote. There is a issue with Windows. The whole attacking the messenger, the whole idiotic argumentation's that Windows is dying, it is all pure useless trolling the people who ask a simple questions: How to solve the D 64bit issue so that like on the Linux or OSx platform, the users can have the SAME level of consistency. Its so strange that Go has solved the 64bit Windows a long time ago. Or C. Or C++ ... and so many other compilers that do NOT need VS installed to produce 64bit binaries on the Windows platform. So in other words, all these comments about just install VS are pure bullshit. If you do not like to answer the question, then do not troll people. And frankly, Walter or whoever, there needed to have been put a stop to this anti Windows bullshit several days ago. As long as people use this level of disrespect towards community members because they are not using the "right" platform. /Signed: A pissed off Windows user
Re: Note from a donor
On Friday, 27 October 2017 at 05:20:05 UTC, codephantom wrote: That's it! I've had enough! 4 hours wasted! Please try getting some editors going for D on Windows like Visual Studio Code or Atom. That time wasted will skyrocket even more when you run into one of the many issues. Linux installation is not much better. Brew ... took a hour to install but only had dmd not dub for some reason. The install script on the website: curl -fsS https://dlang.org/install.sh | bash -s dmd Well, that forces people to use: source ~/dlang/dmd-2.076.1/activate Each time they want to work with D. And it does not play nice with WSL because it never gets loaded so trying to access dmd from outside the WSL does not work. Download the Ubuntu/Debian deb file ... well, you better have google near you. How hard is it to have "sudo dpkg -i DEB_PACKAGE" as a instruction clearly on the website instead of only the deb file link... :) Or write in clear way simply: wget http://downloads.dlang.org/releases/2.x/2.076.1/dmd_2.076.1-0_amd64.deb sudo dpkg -i dmd_2.076.1-0_amd64.deb
Re: Note from a donor
On Thursday, 26 October 2017 at 12:36:40 UTC, jmh530 wrote: However, if you need Visual Studio installed, then that takes like a half an hour. And a gig of space, just because D needs a small part of it. That is why people do not want to install VS. Why install a competing language studio, when you are installing D.
