Re: Release D 2.067.0
On Thursday, 26 March 2015 at 06:16:59 UTC, ketmar wrote: On Tue, 24 Mar 2015 21:56:29 +, Tove wrote: On Tuesday, 24 March 2015 at 17:08:03 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote: Glad to announce D 2.067.0. https://dlang.dawg.eu/downloads/dmd.2.067.0/ -Martin Congrats! Although, I must admit, I was a little saddened to see that multiple alias this didn't make the release, I thought it was finalized... I should have kept a closer watch. and even single `alias this` is broken, so deadcode can't be build with 2.067. i told about that, but nobody cares, as usual. Was it filed at issues.dlang.org as a regression?
Re: Gary Willoughby: Why Go's design is a disservice to intelligent programmers
On Wed, 2015-03-25 at 14:00 -0700, Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/30ad8b/why_gos_design_is_a_disservice_to_intelligent/ Andrei The reaction in the Go community to this article has been exactly as one would have anticipated. I paraphrase the common theme thus: Go is successful in the market, D isn't, therefore Go is a better language than D. Go does indeed have much greater market penetration, but I leave it as an exercise for the reader to deduce the sophistry, and indeed casuistry, in most of the argumentation. Interestingly, or not, Erlang and Go are bringing better concurrency and parallelism to Java. If there was some design/programming resource, is would be good to revisit D's std.concurrency and std.parallelism, in the light of the fibres stuff, to do something not dissimilar to the Quasar framework so as to provide an integrated actor/dataflow/CSP/data parallelism framework for D. As GPars has shown, trying to do this stuff on volunteer labour alone just doesn't work. -- Russel. = Dr Russel Winder t: +44 20 7585 2200 voip: sip:russel.win...@ekiga.net 41 Buckmaster Roadm: +44 7770 465 077 xmpp: rus...@winder.org.uk London SW11 1EN, UK w: www.russel.org.uk skype: russel_winder signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Gary Willoughby: Why Go's design is a disservice to intelligent programmers
On Thursday, 26 March 2015 at 10:17:42 UTC, Kagamin wrote: On Wednesday, 25 March 2015 at 22:30:15 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote: Downplaying other languages makes the D crowd look desperate... Heh, there were whole sites like phpain (can't find it now) and something similar for C++. It happens in the IDE world too. http://www.ihateeclipse.com/ As physics student new to programming I agree with most of the Go comments in the blog. bye, Amber
Re: Gary Willoughby: Why Go's design is a disservice to intelligent programmers
I wrote the article in a rush last night (girlfriend calling me to bed) and as a result it has a few spelling/grammar errors which I've hopefully corrected. The article is a total rant about Go after using it over the last month or so for a project. I honestly was getting so bored with Go and the article that I was literally falling asleep writing it. lol! Is started liking Go but after a while I found it increasing difficult trying to change me way of working to shoehorn solutions into such a simple language. I know it's a bit unfair in places and it's got a click bait title but who cares? I got my point across and I think people understand where i'm coming from. It seems to have got really popular and I've been swamped with mail, etc. I think it's the most read article i've ever written. ha! :o)
Re: Gary Willoughby: Why Go's design is a disservice to intelligent programmers
On Thursday, 26 March 2015 at 00:08:28 UTC, bachmeier wrote: On Wednesday, 25 March 2015 at 22:30:15 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote: Go has stability, is production ready and has an ecosystem with commercial value. You could say the same things about Cobol or PHP, but that doesn't mean the languages themselves should be free from criticism. There is a difference between claiming that language A makes this and that difficult and claiming that language B is better than A. To claim the latter you need to look at comparable larger real world programs and how it fares regarding scaling and maintainability issues. My opinion of Go was very much consistent with the article. It doesn't mean much to me to have a stable language that I don't want to use. His points are valid. I could easily make similar points about D and it's somewhat messed up type system, syntax and libraries. It would be quite easy to convincingly claim that C++/Go/Python are a better languages than D. The Go designers keep the language small and polish it to production quality before moving on with new features. Some of the Go designers also have acknowledged that exceptions and generics can be useful, but that they don't want to add features until they know it is the right thing to do and how to go about it. If you aren't making a research language (and D most certainly would fail in that arena) the only thing that matters is how it fares in a production setting by programmers who do full time programming in the language.
Re: Gary Willoughby: Why Go's design is a disservice to intelligent programmers
On Wednesday, 25 March 2015 at 22:30:15 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote: Downplaying other languages makes the D crowd look desperate... Heh, there were whole sites like phpain (can't find it now) and something similar for C++.
Re: Release D 2.067.0
On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 10:13:42 +, John Colvin wrote: On Thursday, 26 March 2015 at 06:16:59 UTC, ketmar wrote: On Tue, 24 Mar 2015 21:56:29 +, Tove wrote: On Tuesday, 24 March 2015 at 17:08:03 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote: Glad to announce D 2.067.0. https://dlang.dawg.eu/downloads/dmd.2.067.0/ -Martin Congrats! Although, I must admit, I was a little saddened to see that multiple alias this didn't make the release, I thought it was finalized... I should have kept a closer watch. and even single `alias this` is broken, so deadcode can't be build with 2.067. i told about that, but nobody cares, as usual. Was it filed at issues.dlang.org as a regression? nope, it's not. i was asking for help in general (building minimised sample), but nobody was interested. neither do i, actually, as i believe that `alias this` is an abomination and ugly hack. maybe Kenji will fill the bug if he'll find a time for that. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Gary Willoughby: Why Go's design is a disservice to intelligent programmers
On Thursday, 26 March 2015 at 10:17:42 UTC, Kagamin wrote: On Wednesday, 25 March 2015 at 22:30:15 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote: Downplaying other languages makes the D crowd look desperate... Heh, there were whole sites like phpain (can't find it now) and something similar for C++. The feature set of C++ does cause maintenance issues in real world codebases if you let programmers roam about freely and redefine the syntax/semantics. More so than C with it's limited feature set. Are you sure that D does not have similar issues? I have no idea how Go fares, but orthogonal simplicity could be an advantage in real world code bases where you read code other people have written/mutated. What I find interesting is that Python also has a feature set for redefining semantics that should cause C++ like issues. Still, I find most Python libraries I use to be fairly clean and intuitive. Maybe the fact that Python is untyped and non-performance-oriented makes programmers constrain themselves more from producing spaghetti libraries...?
Re: Gary Willoughby: Why Go's design is a disservice to intelligent programmers
On Thursday, 26 March 2015 at 06:05:25 UTC, ketmar wrote: On Wed, 25 Mar 2015 22:30:10 +, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote: Downplaying other languages makes the D crowd look desperate... and we are. see for example bug#14035. typesystem? lolwut, never heard about that thing! that's why i'd better report bugs directly to Kenji: he is a sane person. D most certainly needs stronger typing, not sure why it tries to propagate the weak typing of C. I find myself adding extra template parameters and explicit in my C++ code just to get stronger typing. New AoT languages ought to do better than C++. What Go really got right was to have untyped literals. If you combine that with a orthogonal weak-cast operator with pleasant syntax then you have something. Strong explicit typing also makes it possible to overload on return values... Something I really want to see in a C++ replacement language.
Re: DlangUI
On Tuesday, 20 May 2014 at 18:13:36 UTC, Vadim Lopatin wrote: Hello! I would like to announce my project, DlangUI library - SNIP Hi Vadim, I have just installed the latest D 2.067.0, ran the git install and the build now fails. The errors are as follows: C:\D\dmd2\gui\dlanguidub run dlangui:example1 --build=release Building package dlangui:example1 in C:\D\dmd2\gui\dlangui\examples\example1\ Target gl3n 1.0.1 is up to date. Use --force to rebuild. Building dlib ~master configuration library, build type release. Running dmd... ..\..\..\..\Users\mikej\AppData\Roaming\dub\packages\dlib-master\dlib\image\io\jpeg.d(681): Warning: instead of C-style syntax, use D-style syntax 'ubyte[64] dezigzag' ..\..\..\..\Users\mikej\AppData\Roaming\dub\packages\dlib-master\dlib\filesystem\windows\directory.d(77): Error: undefin ed identifier wcslen FAIL ..\..\..\..\Users\mikej\AppData\Roaming\dub\packages\dlib-master\.dub\build\library-release-windows-x86-dmd_2067-17 3DBA1310DF90D85EA81F6AA09FBD95\ dlib staticLibrary Error executing command run: dmd failed with exit code 1. C:\D\dmd2\gui\dlangui any clues? Thanks. Regards, Mike.
Re: DlangUI
On Thursday, 26 March 2015 at 11:41:17 UTC, Mike James wrote: On Tuesday, 20 May 2014 at 18:13:36 UTC, Vadim Lopatin wrote: Hello! I would like to announce my project, DlangUI library - SNIP Hi Vadim, I have just installed the latest D 2.067.0, ran the git install and the build now fails. The errors are as follows: C:\D\dmd2\gui\dlanguidub run dlangui:example1 --build=release Building package dlangui:example1 in C:\D\dmd2\gui\dlangui\examples\example1\ Target gl3n 1.0.1 is up to date. Use --force to rebuild. Building dlib ~master configuration library, build type release. Running dmd... ..\..\..\..\Users\mikej\AppData\Roaming\dub\packages\dlib-master\dlib\image\io\jpeg.d(681): Warning: instead of C-style syntax, use D-style syntax 'ubyte[64] dezigzag' ..\..\..\..\Users\mikej\AppData\Roaming\dub\packages\dlib-master\dlib\filesystem\windows\directory.d(77): Error: undefin ed identifier wcslen FAIL ..\..\..\..\Users\mikej\AppData\Roaming\dub\packages\dlib-master\.dub\build\library-release-windows-x86-dmd_2067-17 3DBA1310DF90D85EA81F6AA09FBD95\ dlib staticLibrary Error executing command run: dmd failed with exit code 1. C:\D\dmd2\gui\dlangui any clues? Thanks. Regards, Mike. Try `dub upgrade --force-remove` followed by `dub build --force`
Re: Gary Willoughby: Why Go's design is a disservice to intelligent programmers
On Thursday, 26 March 2015 at 12:27:14 UTC, Chris wrote: Further down the road, people will ask for more features in Go, and there will be patches and more patches, until we'll have Go++. Quite possible. Being open source it is quite likely that some outsiders create a go++. I can see that coming when/if they get their runtime up to snuff, it could be a promising starting point for new concurrent GC-based languages. Maybe even a starting point for a D3 language? This, or they won't get the features and move on to other language. Of course, Google is trying to prevent this by binding as many users as possible right now, so it will be hard to leave. The oldest trick in the IT hat. ... or Google abandons Go! Ha ha ha. Yeah, I doubt Google care about people leaving Go, or that they have invested all that much in Go. We'll have to keep in mind that they hire 1000s of programmers, spending a few on some experimental programming projects like Go and Dart is probably just reasonable RD. They also spend RD on Angular, Polymer, AtScript, the Closure-compiler, and a slew of other projects. As far as I am concerned Google don't back Go until it is fully supported on App Engine.
Re: Release D 2.067.0
On Thursday, 26 March 2015 at 11:25:50 UTC, ketmar wrote: On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 10:13:42 +, John Colvin wrote: On Thursday, 26 March 2015 at 06:16:59 UTC, ketmar wrote: On Tue, 24 Mar 2015 21:56:29 +, Tove wrote: On Tuesday, 24 March 2015 at 17:08:03 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote: Glad to announce D 2.067.0. https://dlang.dawg.eu/downloads/dmd.2.067.0/ -Martin Congrats! Although, I must admit, I was a little saddened to see that multiple alias this didn't make the release, I thought it was finalized... I should have kept a closer watch. and even single `alias this` is broken, so deadcode can't be build with 2.067. i told about that, but nobody cares, as usual. Was it filed at issues.dlang.org as a regression? nope, it's not. i was asking for help in general (building minimised sample), but nobody was interested. neither do i, actually, as i believe that `alias this` is an abomination and ugly hack. maybe Kenji will fill the bug if he'll find a time for that. This is (one of the many reasons) why we can't have nice things. You knew there was a regression and you didn't report it. A report without a minimised example is still better than no report at all, especially if it's a regression!
Re: Gary Willoughby: Why Go's design is a disservice to intelligent programmers
On Thursday, 26 March 2015 at 11:29:20 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote: On Thursday, 26 March 2015 at 10:17:42 UTC, Kagamin wrote: On Wednesday, 25 March 2015 at 22:30:15 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote: Downplaying other languages makes the D crowd look desperate... Heh, there were whole sites like phpain (can't find it now) and something similar for C++. The feature set of C++ does cause maintenance issues in real world codebases if you let programmers roam about freely and redefine the syntax/semantics. More so than C with it's limited feature set. Are you sure that D does not have similar issues? I have no idea how Go fares, but orthogonal simplicity could be an advantage in real world code bases where you read code other people have written/mutated. What I find interesting is that Python also has a feature set for redefining semantics that should cause C++ like issues. Still, I find most Python libraries I use to be fairly clean and intuitive. Maybe the fact that Python is untyped and non-performance-oriented makes programmers constrain themselves more from producing spaghetti libraries...? Further down the road, people will ask for more features in Go, and there will be patches and more patches, until we'll have Go++. This, or they won't get the features and move on to other language. Of course, Google is trying to prevent this by binding as many users as possible right now, so it will be hard to leave. The oldest trick in the IT hat. ... or Google abandons Go! Ha ha ha.
Re: DlangUI
On Thursday, 26 March 2015 at 11:47:59 UTC, Vadim Lopatin wrote: On Thursday, 26 March 2015 at 11:41:17 UTC, Mike James wrote: On Tuesday, 20 May 2014 at 18:13:36 UTC, Vadim Lopatin wrote: Hello! I would like to announce my project, DlangUI library - SNIP Hi Vadim, I have just installed the latest D 2.067.0, ran the git install and the build now fails. The errors are as follows: C:\D\dmd2\gui\dlanguidub run dlangui:example1 --build=release Building package dlangui:example1 in C:\D\dmd2\gui\dlangui\examples\example1\ Target gl3n 1.0.1 is up to date. Use --force to rebuild. Building dlib ~master configuration library, build type release. Running dmd... ..\..\..\..\Users\mikej\AppData\Roaming\dub\packages\dlib-master\dlib\image\io\jpeg.d(681): Warning: instead of C-style syntax, use D-style syntax 'ubyte[64] dezigzag' ..\..\..\..\Users\mikej\AppData\Roaming\dub\packages\dlib-master\dlib\filesystem\windows\directory.d(77): Error: undefin ed identifier wcslen FAIL ..\..\..\..\Users\mikej\AppData\Roaming\dub\packages\dlib-master\.dub\build\library-release-windows-x86-dmd_2067-17 3DBA1310DF90D85EA81F6AA09FBD95\ dlib staticLibrary Error executing command run: dmd failed with exit code 1. C:\D\dmd2\gui\dlangui any clues? Thanks. Regards, Mike. Try `dub upgrade --force-remove` followed by `dub build --force` Thanks Vadim, That did the trick. regards, -=mike=-
Re: Gary Willoughby: Why Go's design is a disservice to intelligent programmers
On 3/26/2015 8:53 PM, Laeeth Isharc wrote: It's also the view of Feynman, not to mention many great minds of the past. Ie it is limiting to insist on data before forming a strong opinion about something (which is not to say that one may not change one's mind in the face of contrary data). Feynman's books are all worth reading, even if you have no interest in physics. His attitude about things is just a marvel. I once had a roundtable discussion with the question if you could resurrect any historical figure, who would it be? I nominated Feynman, and that pretty much ended the discussion :-) nobody could think of anyone more appropriate. So yeah, I definitely take inspiration from him.
Re: Gary Willoughby: Why Go's design is a disservice to intelligent programmers
On Friday, 27 March 2015 at 01:47:57 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: On 3/26/2015 12:40 PM, Russel Winder via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: (Almost) All publicity is good publicity. I attended a presentation at NWCPP on Go last week. I have never written a Go program, so filter my opinion on that. It seems to me that every significant but one feature of Go has a pretty much direct analog in D, i.e. you can write Go code in D much like you can write C code in D. The one difference was Go's support for green threads. There's no technical reason why D can't have green threads, it's just that nobody has written the library code to do it. vibe has (experimental?) green threads, doesn't it? I don't keep up with vibe, so I may be wrong.
Re: Gary Willoughby: Why Go's design is a disservice to intelligent programmers
That kind of articles are bad for the image of the D community Nick S: No. Just...no. I'm honestly *really* tired of general society's (seemingly?) increasing intolerance FOR intolerance. Some things ARE bad. Some ideas are dumb ideas (ie without merit). Some features are bad features. Some products really are crappy products. Calling it out when you see it, using a frank explanation of your reasoning, isn't bad, it's productive. Excellence is incompatible with tolerating mediocrity or what is appalling, and what I have seen is that there are aesthetic aspects to creative endeavours not conventionally thought of as having an aesthetic element, and it is in the nature of such things that one cannot and should not tolerate what one perceives to be ugly in a creative endeavour. If one is driven mostly by ROI rather than high feelings, one doesn't get to excellence. So it is my belief that dealing with creative people means dealing with a certain ... intensity. That (on the aesthetic aspects of technical fields) is not just my opinion, but also (I think) that of a certain Mr W Bright, judging by his comments on how good code should look and on good aircraft design, although he presented this in his usual low-key manner. I was looking for a language that was beautiful, as well as powerful, and for whatever it is worth, this was a factor of high appeal with D. It's also the view of Feynman, not to mention many great minds of the past. Ie it is limiting to insist on data before forming a strong opinion about something (which is not to say that one may not change one's mind in the face of contrary data). You can recognize truth by its beauty and simplicity. When you get it right, it is obvious that it is right—at least if you have any experience—because usually what happens is that more comes out than goes in. ...The inexperienced, the crackpots, and people like that, make guesses that are simple, but you can immediately see that they are wrong, so that does not count. Others, the inexperienced students, make guesses that are very complicated, and it sort of looks as if it is all right, but I know it is not true because the truth always turns out to be simpler than you thought. - Feynman via Wikiquote (but the same idea comes across in his books). To discourage dissent, objections, or complaints is to rob ourselves of potential improvement. *That's* what critique and complaints and objections ARE: Recognition of the potential for improvement. There *cannot* be progress and improvement without first identifying existing faults. If nobody ever identified and voiced criticism of punchcards, for example, we'd all still be stuck in the world of 1950's computing. Excellently put. (And, I would add, a constructive draw towards what is generative - not just fault-finding). It's not as if the D crowd doesn't critique itself and it's own language just plenty, so it's not like there's any hypocrisy here. And I'm certainly not willing to accept that programmers should be viewed as being part of distinct mutually-exclusive factions based on some single-language allegiance. I'm a D guy. I also happen to be a fan of Nemerle. And both languages have things I hate. So scratch the it's the D crowd idea. Interesting - what should I read about Nemerle, and what is it best at ? And seriously, the article in question barely mentions D at all. So no, this is NOT some sort of D community piece attacking another language as some comments seem to imply. It is merely an isolated critique of one language by someone who happens to be *using* the given language. There are some very interesting psychological dynamics in the reaction to this kind of piece. For me it was key that although it was clearly written in a humorous tone, and hurriedly, he seemed to speak from the heart - it is refreshing to see such work even when one doesn't agree with it. BTW since when has linking to something been an endorsement of it?
Re: Gary Willoughby: Why Go's design is a disservice to intelligent programmers
On Thursday, 26 March 2015 at 19:37:30 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote: On Thursday, 26 March 2015 at 19:16:54 UTC, bachmeier wrote: You're making a big assumption about which programmers and projects count and which don't. I wonder if outside of Google It doesn't matter what the programmers think, what matters is how the development environment affects the project in measurable terms. Having all kinds of features does not necessarily benefit projects. That's the difference between a fun toy language and one aiming for production and maintenance. Programming is - for now - still a human activity, and what is important in human activities may not always be measured, and what may be easily measured is not always important. That doesn't mean one should throw away the profiler and go back to guessing, but it does suggest caution about adopting the prestigious techniques of the natural sciences and applying them to a domain where they don't necessarily fully belong. I say this as someone coming from the financial markets, where we have all experienced quite recently the effects of mistaking being quantitative for thinking soundly - what happened ought not to have been a surprise, and of those who saw 2008 coming and spoke publicly about it, I don't think a single one based their view on the quant especially. Yet the field of macroeconomics is much more fully developed than that of assessing programmer productivity and quality of output. It is not scientific to depend on an approach that has not yet proven itself in practical terms over the course of time and in different environments. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientism http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/feyerabend/ Laeeth.
Re: Gary Willoughby: Why Go's design is a disservice to intelligent programmers
On 3/26/2015 7:06 PM, weaselcat wrote: vibe has (experimental?) green threads, doesn't it? I don't keep up with vibe, so I may be wrong. I don't know, but if it does have good 'uns they should be moved into Phobos!
Re: Gary Willoughby: Why Go's design is a disservice to intelligent programmers
On 03/26/2015 04:44 AM, Gary Willoughby wrote: I wrote the article in a rush last night (girlfriend calling me to bed) and as a result it has a few spelling/grammar errors which I've hopefully corrected. The article is a total rant about Go after using it over the last month or so for a project. I honestly was getting so bored with Go and the article that I was literally falling asleep writing it. lol! Is started liking Go but after a while I found it increasing difficult trying to change me way of working to shoehorn solutions into such a simple language. I know it's a bit unfair in places and it's got a click bait title but who cares? I got my point across and I think people understand where i'm coming from. It seems to have got really popular and I've been swamped with mail, etc. I think it's the most read article i've ever written. ha! :o) It's funny how the posts that people love to hate are the biggest successes. On my site, I've made probably about about a hundred or so posts, but by FAR the most popular one based on hits and number of comments (in fact one of the very few that ever gets any hits/comments *at all*), was the one where I just bitched and ranted and swore and vented all about dynamic languages and especially Python. Heck, I got as much appreciative comments as I did disapproving ones. And more still roll in now and then. I really need to put up an ad there ;) But it really is true, controversy sells. Of course I'm not saying that makes trolling good (although I'm absolutely *amazed* that so many on reddit actually see your article as trolling - it obviously isn't, they clearly didn't even read it. Some of them even think *you're* the one who's calling many programmers lesser rather than Rob Pike), but it's amazing how much dissonance there is between what people think they hate to read and what they reward with their time and energy and comments. Oh, also, I wanted to point out one other thing. On a modern net where sites that look like this are common: http://thedailywtf.com/articles/are-you-down-with-php- http://thedailywtf.com/series/code-sod The visual style on your site is refreshingly easy to look at and read.
Re: Gary Willoughby: Why Go's design is a disservice to intelligent programmers
On Wednesday, 25 March 2015 at 23:00:32 UTC, bearophile wrote: Ola Fosheim Grøstad: Downplaying other languages makes the D crowd look desperate... That kind of articles are bad for the image of the D community (and the D code shown in that article is not the best). Bye, bearophile I don't think it's that bad. The general sentiment in the comments seems to agree with the article despite (or because of) its strong opinionation, and apparently this is the most popular article Gary has ever written, which is good publicity for D.
Re: Digger 1.1
On 2015-03-25 20:19:53 +, Vladimir Panteleev said: OK, let me know. Might be better to take this discussion to a GitHub issue. https://github.com/CyberShadow/Digger/issues 2.067.0 can be build and installed without any problems. So, I don't think an issue is necessary. Keep up the good work. -- Robert M. Münch http://www.saphirion.com smarter | better | faster
Re: Gary Willoughby: Why Go's design is a disservice to intelligent programmers
On Thu, 2015-03-26 at 12:33 -0700, Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: On 3/26/2015 1:44 AM, Gary Willoughby wrote: I know it's a bit unfair in places and it's got a click bait title but who cares? I got my point across and I think people understand where i'm coming from. It seems to have got really popular and I've been swamped with mail, etc. I think it's the most read article i've ever written. ha! :o) You've managed to get 376 points and 663 comments, which is probably a record for any Reddit D related article! For better or worse, you've clearly struck a nerve. Welcome to the world of guerilla marketing. (Almost) All publicity is good publicity. -- Russel. = Dr Russel Winder t: +44 20 7585 2200 voip: sip:russel.win...@ekiga.net 41 Buckmaster Roadm: +44 7770 465 077 xmpp: rus...@winder.org.uk London SW11 1EN, UK w: www.russel.org.uk skype: russel_winder signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Gary Willoughby: Why Go's design is a disservice to intelligent programmers
On Thursday, 26 March 2015 at 19:16:54 UTC, bachmeier wrote: You're making a big assumption about which programmers and projects count and which don't. I wonder if outside of Google It doesn't matter what the programmers think, what matters is how the development environment affects the project in measurable terms. Having all kinds of features does not necessarily benefit projects. That's the difference between a fun toy language and one aiming for production and maintenance.
Re: Gary Willoughby: Why Go's design is a disservice to intelligent programmers
On 03/25/2015 07:00 PM, bearophile wrote: Ola Fosheim Grøstad: Downplaying other languages makes the D crowd look desperate... That kind of articles are bad for the image of the D community No. Just...no. I'm honestly *really* tired of general society's (seemingly?) increasing intolerance FOR intolerance. Some things ARE bad. Some ideas are dumb ideas (ie without merit). Some features are bad features. Some products really are crappy products. Calling it out when you see it, using a frank explanation of your reasoning, isn't bad, it's productive. To discourage dissent, objections, or complaints is to rob ourselves of potential improvement. *That's* what critique and complaints and objections ARE: Recognition of the potential for improvement. There *cannot* be progress and improvement without first identifying existing faults. If nobody ever identified and voiced criticism of punchcards, for example, we'd all still be stuck in the world of 1950's computing. It's not as if the D crowd doesn't critique itself and it's own language just plenty, so it's not like there's any hypocrisy here. And I'm certainly not willing to accept that programmers should be viewed as being part of distinct mutually-exclusive factions based on some single-language allegiance. I'm a D guy. I also happen to be a fan of Nemerle. And both languages have things I hate. So scratch the it's the D crowd idea. And seriously, the article in question barely mentions D at all. So no, this is NOT some sort of D community piece attacking another language as some comments seem to imply. It is merely an isolated critique of one language by someone who happens to be *using* the given language. So he happens to also use D? So what? A lot of people use a lot of langauges. I'm sure the author's used more than just Go and D, too. That certainly doesn't make it one language attacking another. Maybe he's a fan of burritos, too. Maybe then we could take it as a ZOMG! The burrito enthusiasts are attacking golang!
Re: Gary Willoughby: Why Go's design is a disservice to intelligent programmers
On Thursday, 26 March 2015 at 18:00:29 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote: So no, this is NOT some sort of D community piece attacking another language as some comments seem to imply. It is merely an isolated critique of one language by someone who happens to be *using* the given language. == digitalmars.D.announce
Re: Release D 2.067.0
On Wednesday, 25 March 2015 at 21:13:14 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: On 3/25/15 1:32 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: On 3/25/15 12:39 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: On 3/24/15 10:07 AM, Martin Nowak wrote: Glad to announce D 2.067.0. Spreading the news: [snip] Nice, we seem to be on HackerNews' front page: https://news.ycombinator.com/ And apparently we did something wrong - somehow we fell in minutes from position 11 to position 41. -- Andrei maybe people don't give a s**t? now over 80
Re: Gary Willoughby: Why Go's design is a disservice to intelligent programmers
On Thursday, 26 March 2015 at 08:53:31 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote: There is a difference between claiming that language A makes this and that difficult and claiming that language B is better than A. We have different interpretations of the article. My reading was I hate these properties of Go. If you aren't making a research language (and D most certainly would fail in that arena) the only thing that matters is how it fares in a production setting by programmers who do full time programming in the language. You're making a big assumption about which programmers and projects count and which don't. I wonder if outside of Google if there are even 100 programmers working full time exclusively with Go. I don't work full time with D, but I work with it a lot, and I don't see why my experience shouldn't count.
Re: Gary Willoughby: Why Go's design is a disservice to intelligent programmers
On 03/25/2015 11:11 PM, lobo wrote: Overall the blog post is a bit immature with little rigor and too much emotion. I can't comment on the accuracy of the comparisons, but FWIW, I'd take immature and emotional over dry, corporate and PC any day. :) Life's too short to be bland.
Re: Gary Willoughby: Why Go's design is a disservice to intelligent programmers
On Thu, 2015-03-26 at 14:37 -0400, Nick Sabalausky via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: On 03/26/2015 04:38 AM, Russel Winder via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: I paraphrase the common theme thus: Go is successful in the market, D isn't, therefore Go is a better language than D. I love how Go's very own reasoning there naturally suggests that PHP, C++, and Java must all be vastly superior to Go. Did I mention sophistry and casuistry? -- Russel. = Dr Russel Winder t: +44 20 7585 2200 voip: sip:russel.win...@ekiga.net 41 Buckmaster Roadm: +44 7770 465 077 xmpp: rus...@winder.org.uk London SW11 1EN, UK w: www.russel.org.uk skype: russel_winder signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part
Re: Gary Willoughby: Why Go's design is a disservice to intelligent programmers
On 03/26/2015 02:00 PM, Nick Sabalausky wrote: And seriously, the article in question barely mentions D at all. Sorry, what I meant is it doesn't rely on D, and D Go is very clearly NOT the point the article is trying to make. It's just used for contrast, to illustrate the points. It could've been other languages as well.
Re: Gary Willoughby: Why Go's design is a disservice to intelligent programmers
On 03/26/2015 02:04 PM, Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQi?= ola.fosheim.grostad+dl...@gmail.com wrote: On Thursday, 26 March 2015 at 18:00:29 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote: So no, this is NOT some sort of D community piece attacking another language as some comments seem to imply. It is merely an isolated critique of one language by someone who happens to be *using* the given language. == digitalmars.D.announce Oh, so you were merely objecting to it being posted on D.announce rather than objecting to the article itself? Nevermind then.
Re: Gary Willoughby: Why Go's design is a disservice to intelligent programmers
On Thursday, 26 March 2015 at 18:07:39 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote: On 03/26/2015 02:04 PM, Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQi?= ola.fosheim.grostad+dl...@gmail.com wrote: On Thursday, 26 March 2015 at 18:00:29 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote: So no, this is NOT some sort of D community piece attacking another language as some comments seem to imply. It is merely an isolated critique of one language by someone who happens to be *using* the given language. == digitalmars.D.announce Oh, so you were merely objecting to it being posted on D.announce rather than objecting to the article itself? Nevermind then. I was merely pointing out that the D community comes through as desperate. Whether that is objectionable depends on how one wants to be perceived? Maybe it is the truth? In that case it is a good thing that it comes through as desperate!! ;^) And yes, when it is posted to the announcement list by one of the D language designers it is given a different status than merely being a random rant using toy examples. Obvious ranting is okish if it doesn't pretend to be more than that, but then it isn't something to be announced... is it? http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/people_who_live_in_glass_houses_shouldn%27t_throw_stones
Re: Release D 2.067.0
On Thursday, 26 March 2015 at 16:13:11 UTC, Jack Death wrote: On Wednesday, 25 March 2015 at 21:13:14 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: On 3/25/15 1:32 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: On 3/25/15 12:39 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: On 3/24/15 10:07 AM, Martin Nowak wrote: Glad to announce D 2.067.0. Spreading the news: [snip] Nice, we seem to be on HackerNews' front page: https://news.ycombinator.com/ And apparently we did something wrong - somehow we fell in minutes from position 11 to position 41. -- Andrei maybe people don't give a s**t? now over 80 they can and do move things up and down.
Re: Gary Willoughby: Why Go's design is a disservice to intelligent programmers
Btw, I have nothing against people complaining about Go's lack of productivity features and pointing out that they have competition from D. After all, I too did some ranting on the topic back in 2009: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/golang-nuts/TTCaIpSxn2U%5B1-25%5D «I think Go has set off onto a very nice track, but it doesn't seem like you guys have really managed to communicate in which direction you are heading. I expect Go to improve, but if it isn't going to provide for more error-catching facilities then it probably isn't worth the trouble. Go has more competition than C and C++: D comes to mind along with other smaller competitors.» Nothing is new under the sun etc...
Re: Gary Willoughby: Why Go's design is a disservice to intelligent programmers
On 03/26/2015 04:38 AM, Russel Winder via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: I paraphrase the common theme thus: Go is successful in the market, D isn't, therefore Go is a better language than D. I love how Go's very own reasoning there naturally suggests that PHP, C++, and Java must all be vastly superior to Go.
Re: Release D 2.067.0
On Tuesday, 24 March 2015 at 17:08:03 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote: Glad to announce D 2.067.0. This release comes with many improvements. The GC is a lot faster for most use-cases, we have improved C++ interoperability and fixed plenty of bugs. See the changelog for more details. http://dlang.org/changelog.html Download pages and documentation will be updated within the next few hours. http://downloads.dlang.org/releases/2.x/2.067.0/ http://ftp.digitalmars.com/ Until the binaries are mirrored to the official site, you can get them here. https://dlang.dawg.eu/downloads/dmd.2.067.0/ -Martin This is an awesome release. Thanks to all involved! :)
Re: Gary Willoughby: Why Go's design is a disservice to intelligent programmers
On 3/26/2015 1:44 AM, Gary Willoughby wrote: I know it's a bit unfair in places and it's got a click bait title but who cares? I got my point across and I think people understand where i'm coming from. It seems to have got really popular and I've been swamped with mail, etc. I think it's the most read article i've ever written. ha! :o) You've managed to get 376 points and 663 comments, which is probably a record for any Reddit D related article! For better or worse, you've clearly struck a nerve.
Re: DlangUI
On Thursday, 26 March 2015 at 11:47:59 UTC, Vadim Lopatin wrote: Try `dub upgrade --force-remove` followed by `dub build --force` For the love of God, please put this on the github page under troubleshooting. It happens quite a lot.
Re: Gary Willoughby: Why Go's design is a disservice to intelligent programmers
On Thursday, 26 March 2015 at 12:37:31 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote: On Thursday, 26 March 2015 at 12:27:14 UTC, Chris wrote: Further down the road, people will ask for more features in Go, and there will be patches and more patches, until we'll have Go++. Quite possible. Being open source it is quite likely that some outsiders create a go++. I can see that coming when/if they get their runtime up to snuff, it could be a promising starting point for new concurrent GC-based languages. Maybe even a starting point for a D3 language? This, or they won't get the features and move on to other language. Of course, Google is trying to prevent this by binding as many users as possible right now, so it will be hard to leave. The oldest trick in the IT hat. ... or Google abandons Go! Ha ha ha. Yeah, I doubt Google care about people leaving Go, or that they have invested all that much in Go. We'll have to keep in mind that they hire 1000s of programmers, spending a few on some experimental programming projects like Go and Dart is probably just reasonable RD. They also spend RD on Angular, Polymer, AtScript, the Closure-compiler, and a slew of other projects. As far as I am concerned Google don't back Go until it is fully supported on App Engine. The Go language aside, I don't trust Google projects. Too many corpses. I have more confidence in community driven things.
Re: Release D 2.067.0
On 3/26/15 9:13 AM, Jack Death wrote: On Wednesday, 25 March 2015 at 21:13:14 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: On 3/25/15 1:32 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: On 3/25/15 12:39 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: On 3/24/15 10:07 AM, Martin Nowak wrote: Glad to announce D 2.067.0. Spreading the news: [snip] Nice, we seem to be on HackerNews' front page: https://news.ycombinator.com/ And apparently we did something wrong - somehow we fell in minutes from position 11 to position 41. -- Andrei maybe people don't give a s**t? I communicated to an acquaintance at HackerNews and he noticed that their spam algorithm misclassified the post. He has subsequently restored the post's standing (which got back to a slightly lower position due to the time spanned). -- Andrei
Re: Release D 2.067.0
On Thursday, 26 March 2015 at 20:08:23 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: I communicated to an acquaintance at HackerNews and he noticed that their spam algorithm misclassified the post. He has subsequently restored the post's standing (which got back to a slightly lower position due to the time spanned). -- Andrei Is it possible that we're still triggering their voting ring detectors? Maybe we shouldn't announce HN posts here at all?
Re: GtkD 3.1.0 released, GTK+ with D.
On Thursday, 26 March 2015 at 22:41:01 UTC, Mike Wey wrote: GtkD is a D binding and OO wrapper of Gtk+ and is released on the LGPL license. Shortly after the last release, GtkD has been updated for GTK+ 3.16. GtkD 3.1.0 is now available on gtkd.org: http://gtkd.org/download.html This is great, thanks for your efforts. Cheers, stew
Re: Gary Willoughby: Why Go's design is a disservice to intelligent programmers
On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 12:27:13 +, Chris wrote: ... or Google abandons Go! Ha ha ha. they almost did that with Dart, so they have no language to replace Go right now. i think that Go programmers are safe for three or five years. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Release D 2.067.0
On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 12:23:08 +, John Colvin wrote: Was it filed at issues.dlang.org as a regression? nope, it's not. i was asking for help in general (building minimised sample), but nobody was interested. neither do i, actually, as i believe that `alias this` is an abomination and ugly hack. maybe Kenji will fill the bug if he'll find a time for that. This is (one of the many reasons) why we can't have nice things. You knew there was a regression and you didn't report it. A report without a minimised example is still better than no report at all, especially if it's a regression! i tried that before, and it's simply not working this way. there was not enough information to fill the bug report in the first place, as i didn't even know that it's `alias this` to blame. i have other things to do and i can't exclusively dedicate my box to dustmiting that issue (it finally took me 12 hours to dustmite it; yes, it's 12 full hours), so i asked for help in main NG. as nobody was willing to help, i considered that issue unimportant. filling bugs like this huge project not compiling! is not working, as nobody wants to run dustmite on such projects, people just waiting for issue author to provide more information. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Gary Willoughby: Why Go's design is a disservice to intelligent programmers
On Wednesday, 25 March 2015 at 21:00:37 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/30ad8b/why_gos_design_is_a_disservice_to_intelligent/ Andrei Wow this bad, almost like Shots Fired. Although you can tell hes trying to say something by using a vertical line of imports on go and a horizontal line of imports on D to make it look shorter...
Re: Release D 2.067.0
On Wednesday, 25 March 2015 at 21:38:15 UTC, weaselcat wrote: On Tuesday, 24 March 2015 at 17:08:03 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote: Glad to announce D 2.067.0. This release comes with many improvements. The GC is a lot faster for most use-cases, we have improved C++ interoperability and fixed plenty of bugs. See the changelog for more details. http://dlang.org/changelog.html Download pages and documentation will be updated within the next few hours. http://downloads.dlang.org/releases/2.x/2.067.0/ http://ftp.digitalmars.com/ Until the binaries are mirrored to the official site, you can get them here. https://dlang.dawg.eu/downloads/dmd.2.067.0/ -Martin from the reddit thread: Anyone know if there's been any comparisons of different heapSizeFactor values? Primarly, compared to the default 2, 1.5 or 1.618. has anyone working on the GC actually done any comparisons of the new options? nothing?
Re: Gary Willoughby: Why Go's design is a disservice to intelligent programmers
On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 13:17:47 -0400, Nick Sabalausky wrote: Of course I'm not saying that makes trolling good (although I'm absolutely *amazed* that so many on reddit actually see your article as trolling - it obviously isn't, they clearly didn't even read it. Some of them even think *you're* the one who's calling many programmers lesser rather than Rob Pike) that's why i never read comments. especially comments on sites like HN or reddit. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Gary Willoughby: Why Go's design is a disservice to intelligent programmers
On Thursday, 26 March 2015 at 22:43:06 UTC, ketmar wrote: On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 12:27:13 +, Chris wrote: ... or Google abandons Go! Ha ha ha. they almost did that with Dart, so they have no language to replace Go right now. i think that Go programmers are safe for three or five years. average Google product lifespan is something like 4 years.
Re: Deadcode on github
On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 14:17:16 +, Jonas Drewsen wrote: On Thursday, 26 March 2015 at 00:26:58 UTC, Dicebot wrote: On Tuesday, 17 March 2015 at 12:39:00 UTC, Jonas Drewsen wrote: Definitely. I've now made a branch linux on github where linux compiles and links successfully and that also includes steps towards abstracting stuff. Thanks a lot. Sadly this branch still doesn't seem to compile because of other issues (that don't seem to be related to platform portability). I think I will wait for some tagged release before rushing into experiments :) I fully understand. After the next release my focus will be on porting to mac and linux. FYI: i successfully compiled deadcode on GNU/Linux. it still segfaults, though, and it does that deep inside SDL_ttf, trying to render some glyphs. seems that i need to upgrade SDL_ttf (i never used that in my projects, so i never cared about it being up-to-date). will keep you informed on progress, if there will be any. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Gary Willoughby: Why Go's design is a disservice to intelligent programmers
On 03/26/2015 06:36 PM, ketmar wrote: On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 13:17:47 -0400, Nick Sabalausky wrote: Of course I'm not saying that makes trolling good (although I'm absolutely *amazed* that so many on reddit actually see your article as trolling - it obviously isn't, they clearly didn't even read it. Some of them even think *you're* the one who's calling many programmers lesser rather than Rob Pike) that's why i never read comments. especially comments on sites like HN or reddit. I always tell myself to avoid them, but I usually can't help browsing at least a few anyway :) I see reddit more as a topic-driven discussion board though, rather than a comment section, but I'll grant it's a rather blurry line. YouTube comments are notorious for being the real bad ones though. Those ones are easy enough to avoid reading!
Re: Release D 2.067.0
On 3/26/15 1:16 PM, Vladimir Panteleev wrote: On Thursday, 26 March 2015 at 20:08:23 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: I communicated to an acquaintance at HackerNews and he noticed that their spam algorithm misclassified the post. He has subsequently restored the post's standing (which got back to a slightly lower position due to the time spanned). -- Andrei Is it possible that we're still triggering their voting ring detectors? Yah, he told me so. Maybe we shouldn't announce HN posts here at all? We did things by the book, and hopefully we can count on them improving their algorithms. Andrei
Re: Gary Willoughby: Why Go's design is a disservice to intelligent programmers
On 3/26/2015 12:40 PM, Russel Winder via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: (Almost) All publicity is good publicity. I attended a presentation at NWCPP on Go last week. I have never written a Go program, so filter my opinion on that. It seems to me that every significant but one feature of Go has a pretty much direct analog in D, i.e. you can write Go code in D much like you can write C code in D. The one difference was Go's support for green threads. There's no technical reason why D can't have green threads, it's just that nobody has written the library code to do it.
Re: Gary Willoughby: Why Go's design is a disservice to intelligent programmers
On Wed, 25 Mar 2015 22:30:10 +, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote: Downplaying other languages makes the D crowd look desperate... and we are. see for example bug#14035. typesystem? lolwut, never heard about that thing! that's why i'd better report bugs directly to Kenji: he is a sane person. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: DlangUI
On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 03:41:11 +, Jean pierre wrote: DlangUI review and small tutorial is published on Habrahabr - popular russian IT resource (in Russian) http://habrahabr.ru/post/253923/ It does not looks like something with a `soul`. It looks like a copy of something that already exists. And i tell you something, mr Lopatin, people often like more the original than the copy. hm. Vadim is the author of DlangUI. and he wrote the article about it, where he shows how to use the library. so i presume that he... copies himself? heh. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Release D 2.067.0
On Tue, 24 Mar 2015 21:56:29 +, Tove wrote: On Tuesday, 24 March 2015 at 17:08:03 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote: Glad to announce D 2.067.0. https://dlang.dawg.eu/downloads/dmd.2.067.0/ -Martin Congrats! Although, I must admit, I was a little saddened to see that multiple alias this didn't make the release, I thought it was finalized... I should have kept a closer watch. and even single `alias this` is broken, so deadcode can't be build with 2.067. i told about that, but nobody cares, as usual. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Release D 2.067.0
On Wed, 25 Mar 2015 08:07:17 +, thedeemon wrote: On Tuesday, 24 March 2015 at 17:08:03 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote: Glad to announce D 2.067.0. See the changelog for more details. http://dlang.org/changelog.html I don't see any mention of DIP25 here (Sealed references - return ref arguments etc.). Was it implemented and included in this release? it is, but it's still opt-in feature. signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: Gary Willoughby: Why Go's design is a disservice to intelligent programmers
On Wednesday, 25 March 2015 at 21:55:53 UTC, Mathias Lang wrote: I just wish D examples didn't include string lambdas. +100
Re: Gary Willoughby: Why Go's design is a disservice to intelligent programmers
On Thursday, 26 March 2015 at 13:51:32 UTC, Chris wrote: The Go language aside, I don't trust Google projects. Too many corpses. I have more confidence in community driven things. If you can make do with a conglomerate of small things, yes. Python is well suited for that, many small independent bits. I'm ok with Google projects as long as there is a fallback. And there is a fallback for most of the tech they push. (e.g. you can host your own App Engine compatible setup, compile your own Go compiler, etc)
Re: Deadcode on github
On Thursday, 26 March 2015 at 00:26:58 UTC, Dicebot wrote: On Tuesday, 17 March 2015 at 12:39:00 UTC, Jonas Drewsen wrote: Definitely. I've now made a branch linux on github where linux compiles and links successfully and that also includes steps towards abstracting stuff. Thanks a lot. Sadly this branch still doesn't seem to compile because of other issues (that don't seem to be related to platform portability). I think I will wait for some tagged release before rushing into experiments :) I fully understand. After the next release my focus will be on porting to mac and linux. /Jonas
