Re: Vision document for H1 2018

[psychoticRabbit via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On Sunday, 11 March 2018 at 05:41:02 UTC, Dylan Graham wrote:


I regret some of things I said. I'm sorry for any offence 
caused, specifically towards members of the DLF.




I don't think you need to regret saying anything. You've 
demonstrated a willingness to engage in a conversation that we 
can *all* learn from.


I also doubt anyone actually got offended ;-)

.. we're all pretty strong minded here.

But I get back to my point about "programmer" portability.

Other developers of newer languages just don't seem to get that.

And it's hardly surprising that D would be focused in some way, 
on languages used by the vast majority of programmers 
(C/C++/Java/C#... and dare I say it..python)


That is D's great strength. (and betterc is just a part of it - 
and not one that particulary interests me).


Because D resources are rather contstrained, betterc gets more 
push back than it really should. But the main take away point I 
get from that vision statement, is a greater focus on increasing 
contributions - which is really what D needs more than anything 
(apart from a correct and complete language specification).

Re: Vision document for H1 2018

[Dylan Graham via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On Sunday, 11 March 2018 at 04:06:13 UTC, Nick Sabalausky 
(Abscissa) wrote:

On 03/10/2018 05:47 AM, Dylan Graham wrote:

On Saturday, 10 March 2018 at 10:05:49 UTC, rumbu wrote:


According to the State of D Survey, 71% of the respondents 
don't care about betterC. Why is betterC on the priority list?


Yeah. Why should D worry about tying itself into C when it 
can't even interface with itself through DLLs?


First of all, betterC is about far more than interfacing with 
C. In fact, interop with C isn't really what betterC is about 
at all - that's a separate aspect of the language. (And those 
C/C++ users who still haven't come to D - for many of them the 
holdout is *because* of the issues betterC aims to address. 
Make no mistake, for all the stockholm syndrome in the C and 
C++ worlds, there *are* a lot people openly wanting to jump 
ship but don't have a sufficient option yet. Heck, *I'm* a 
C/C++ -> D convert.)


But more importantly:

The D language itself is specifically designed and intended to 
be multi-purpose. Because of that, D users (and potential D 
users) are *highly* diverse. Everybody here has their own 
use-cases, their own needs and priorities, and their own list 
of things they want fixed yesterday.


In a group this diverse, there just simply *isn't* much on the 
D wishlist that's crucially important to a *majority*, because 
we all need completely different things.


Personally, better DLL support have little to no impact on me. 
Obviously it does for you, and I sympathise. Some of the things 
most important to me for D to improve you probably wouldn't 
care one bit about - and that's ok. We work on different sorts 
of things.


Improved betterC is something I would find very nice if I ever 
have time or opportunity to get back into embedded software. 
But outside of that, yea, it doesn't impact me much more than 
it does for you.


But here's the rub: In this crowd here, probably far more than 
most languages, we all have such wildly varying needs that 29% 
*is* what qualifies as significant around here. Most wishlist 
items are going to have similarly non-majority numbers. And 
they have to pick *something* to focus on. Luckily, as the 
vision document clearly states, there are *several* such 
"somethings" the dlang foundation is committing to working on.


You do have a good point. One of my likes for D was its 
flexibility, so it was very hypocritical of me to argue for what 
I did.


I regret some of things I said. I'm sorry for any offence caused, 
specifically towards members of the DLF.


I wish that DLL support was referenced in the vision document. I 
actually like most of what's been said in it, especially the 
@safe, @nogc and editor support. I also see Benjamin Thaut (if 
you're reading this - awesome work!) making progress on DLL 
support, I just wish the foundation could help him out a bit.

Re: Vision document for H1 2018

[Timothee Cour via Digitalmars-d-announce]

IMO this should be the priority:

1. blockers (things that can't be worked around at all or not without
jumping through a lot of hoops)
2. everything else

dmd still doesn't support shared libraries on OSX (cf
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12190)

That prevents a whole category of use cases (eg D plugins called from
C++ or from D)





On Sat, Mar 10, 2018 at 8:06 PM, Nick Sabalausky (Abscissa) via
Digitalmars-d-announce  wrote:
> On 03/10/2018 05:47 AM, Dylan Graham wrote:
>>
>> On Saturday, 10 March 2018 at 10:05:49 UTC, rumbu wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> According to the State of D Survey, 71% of the respondents don't care
>>> about betterC. Why is betterC on the priority list?
>>
>>
>> Yeah. Why should D worry about tying itself into C when it can't even
>> interface with itself through DLLs?
>
>
> First of all, betterC is about far more than interfacing with C. In fact,
> interop with C isn't really what betterC is about at all - that's a separate
> aspect of the language. (And those C/C++ users who still haven't come to D -
> for many of them the holdout is *because* of the issues betterC aims to
> address. Make no mistake, for all the stockholm syndrome in the C and C++
> worlds, there *are* a lot people openly wanting to jump ship but don't have
> a sufficient option yet. Heck, *I'm* a C/C++ -> D convert.)
>
> But more importantly:
>
> The D language itself is specifically designed and intended to be
> multi-purpose. Because of that, D users (and potential D users) are *highly*
> diverse. Everybody here has their own use-cases, their own needs and
> priorities, and their own list of things they want fixed yesterday.
>
> In a group this diverse, there just simply *isn't* much on the D wishlist
> that's crucially important to a *majority*, because we all need completely
> different things.
>
> Personally, better DLL support have little to no impact on me. Obviously it
> does for you, and I sympathise. Some of the things most important to me for
> D to improve you probably wouldn't care one bit about - and that's ok. We
> work on different sorts of things.
>
> Improved betterC is something I would find very nice if I ever have time or
> opportunity to get back into embedded software. But outside of that, yea, it
> doesn't impact me much more than it does for you.
>
> But here's the rub: In this crowd here, probably far more than most
> languages, we all have such wildly varying needs that 29% *is* what
> qualifies as significant around here. Most wishlist items are going to have
> similarly non-majority numbers. And they have to pick *something* to focus
> on. Luckily, as the vision document clearly states, there are *several* such
> "somethings" the dlang foundation is committing to working on.

Re: Vision document for H1 2018

[Nick Sabalausky (Abscissa) via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On 03/10/2018 05:47 AM, Dylan Graham wrote:

On Saturday, 10 March 2018 at 10:05:49 UTC, rumbu wrote:


According to the State of D Survey, 71% of the respondents don't care 
about betterC. Why is betterC on the priority list?


Yeah. Why should D worry about tying itself into C when it can't even 
interface with itself through DLLs?


First of all, betterC is about far more than interfacing with C. In 
fact, interop with C isn't really what betterC is about at all - that's 
a separate aspect of the language. (And those C/C++ users who still 
haven't come to D - for many of them the holdout is *because* of the 
issues betterC aims to address. Make no mistake, for all the stockholm 
syndrome in the C and C++ worlds, there *are* a lot people openly 
wanting to jump ship but don't have a sufficient option yet. Heck, *I'm* 
a C/C++ -> D convert.)


But more importantly:

The D language itself is specifically designed and intended to be 
multi-purpose. Because of that, D users (and potential D users) are 
*highly* diverse. Everybody here has their own use-cases, their own 
needs and priorities, and their own list of things they want fixed 
yesterday.


In a group this diverse, there just simply *isn't* much on the D 
wishlist that's crucially important to a *majority*, because we all need 
completely different things.


Personally, better DLL support have little to no impact on me. Obviously 
it does for you, and I sympathise. Some of the things most important to 
me for D to improve you probably wouldn't care one bit about - and 
that's ok. We work on different sorts of things.


Improved betterC is something I would find very nice if I ever have time 
or opportunity to get back into embedded software. But outside of that, 
yea, it doesn't impact me much more than it does for you.


But here's the rub: In this crowd here, probably far more than most 
languages, we all have such wildly varying needs that 29% *is* what 
qualifies as significant around here. Most wishlist items are going to 
have similarly non-majority numbers. And they have to pick *something* 
to focus on. Luckily, as the vision document clearly states, there are 
*several* such "somethings" the dlang foundation is committing to 
working on.

Re: Vision document for H1 2018

[Dylan Graham via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On Sunday, 11 March 2018 at 02:02:15 UTC, psychoticRabbit wrote:

On Sunday, 11 March 2018 at 01:58:50 UTC, psychoticRabbit wrote:


i.e. How can the D Foundation encourage new additional 
resoures to focus on things that also matter to the community.





and btw. the mention about strengthing the use of DIPS, does 
just that.


there are many improvement to 'process' that can be done to 
encourage more people to contribute to D.


This is not about betterc at all, really.


Then it does seem like things will improve. I hope there will be 
more surveys in the future and I'm very happy with the new DIP 
process.


My original argument was that BetterC is a mismanagement of 
resources, and I still stand by that.

Re: Vision document for H1 2018

[psychoticRabbit via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On Sunday, 11 March 2018 at 01:58:50 UTC, psychoticRabbit wrote:


i.e. How can the D Foundation encourage new additional resoures 
to focus on things that also matter to the community.





and btw. the mention about strengthing the use of DIPS, does just 
that.


there are many improvement to 'process' that can be done to 
encourage more people to contribute to D.


This is not about betterc at all, really.

Re: Vision document for H1 2018

[psychoticRabbit via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On Sunday, 11 March 2018 at 01:53:30 UTC, Dylan Graham wrote:


That sentence was to counter psychoticRabbit. I didn't mean it 
literally. If you've read my earlier posts, it's not BetterC I 
have an issue with, it's the allocation of time.




Well that should have been the basis of your original argument.

i.e. How can the D Foundation encourage new additional resoures 
to focus on things that also matter to the community.


Instead, you started by attacking the D Foundation for allocating 
resources to betterc.

Re: Vision document for H1 2018

[Dylan Graham via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On Sunday, 11 March 2018 at 01:50:22 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:

On Sunday, 11 March 2018 at 01:36:51 UTC, Dylan Graham wrote:



The D Language Foundation, being the leading body of D, should 
hold some responsibility to the interests of the majority.


Please read my post from earlier:

https://forum.dlang.org/post/chsqspkoxbcdqjcqb...@forum.dlang.org

The survey *will* have an influence on what gets priority in 
the future, but it certainly can't be seen as representing the 
majority of D programming interests.




Good. That's definitely for the better.



It is not a dictatorship (read this sentence over and over 
till you get it).


No one is forcing you to use BetterC and its existence doesn't 
change anything about how you can use the language. Obviously, 
there are a number of areas that need work. The survey can help 
decide which of those to put resources into first, but it 
doesn't mean that other things deemed important have to be 
dropped.


That sentence was to counter psychoticRabbit. I didn't mean it 
literally. If you've read my earlier posts, it's not BetterC I 
have an issue with, it's the allocation of time.


As you said, hopefully the survey will help clear up these issues 
with D.

Re: Vision document for H1 2018

[Mike Parker via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On Sunday, 11 March 2018 at 01:36:51 UTC, Dylan Graham wrote:



The D Language Foundation, being the leading body of D, should 
hold some responsibility to the interests of the majority.


Please read my post from earlier:

https://forum.dlang.org/post/chsqspkoxbcdqjcqb...@forum.dlang.org

The survey *will* have an influence on what gets priority in the 
future, but it certainly can't be seen as representing the 
majority of D programming interests.





It is not a dictatorship (read this sentence over and over till 
you get it).


No one is forcing you to use BetterC and its existence doesn't 
change anything about how you can use the language. Obviously, 
there are a number of areas that need work. The survey can help 
decide which of those to put resources into first, but it doesn't 
mean that other things deemed important have to be dropped.

Re: Vision document for H1 2018

[psychoticRabbit via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On Sunday, 11 March 2018 at 01:46:09 UTC, Dylan Graham wrote:


Rust was more popular and who could use that?
Rust is popular because of its ideas, not because it pandered.



I don't see "programmer" portability as being pandering.

It common sense.

Rust is good, in that it seeks to do something different. I like 
that.


But I live in the real world, and need to switch between 
languages often.


Language theory is nice and all that, but "programmer" 
portability is paramount for me.. not popular ideas.


And Rust is popular... with Rust programmers.

Re: Vision document for H1 2018

[Dylan Graham via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On Sunday, 11 March 2018 at 01:41:33 UTC, psychoticRabbit wrote:

On Sunday, 11 March 2018 at 01:25:07 UTC, Dylan Graham wrote:


I'm not sure what you mean at that last sentence.


I mean, cause D is so compatible with C/C++/Java/C# - that you 
can easily switch between them.


Whereas as Go and Rust have their own thing going, making those 
languages really difficult in terms of "programmer" portability.


C++ became popular cause C programmers could easily use it.
Java became popular cause C/C++ programmers could easily use it.
C# became popular cause C/C++/Java programmers could easily use 
it.


D is gradually becoming popular cause C/C++/Java/C# programmers 
can easily use it.


Rust was more popular and who could use that?
Rust is popular because of its ideas, not because it pandered.

Re: Vision document for H1 2018

[psychoticRabbit via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On Sunday, 11 March 2018 at 01:36:51 UTC, Dylan Graham wrote:


The D Language Foundation, being the leading body of D, should 
hold some responsibility to the interests of the majority.



And also the minority. A lesson that humanity has to learn over 
and over again.

Re: Vision document for H1 2018

[Dylan Graham via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On Sunday, 11 March 2018 at 01:45:01 UTC, psychoticRabbit wrote:

On Sunday, 11 March 2018 at 01:36:51 UTC, Dylan Graham wrote:


The D Language Foundation, being the leading body of D, should 
hold some responsibility to the interests of the majority.



And also the minority. A lesson that humanity has to learn over 
and over again.


Despite the fact that D struggles to interface with itself yet 
the priorities of the foundation are to make D easily interface 
with C? I don't care if they listen to the minority, but make 
sure your priorities are in line before doing so. I think BetterC 
will be something useful in the future, not now.

Re: Vision document for H1 2018

[psychoticRabbit via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On Sunday, 11 March 2018 at 01:25:07 UTC, Dylan Graham wrote:


I'm not sure what you mean at that last sentence.


I mean, cause D is so compatible with C/C++/Java/C# - that you 
can easily switch between them.


Whereas as Go and Rust have their own thing going, making those 
languages really difficult in terms of "programmer" portability.


C++ became popular cause C programmers could easily use it.
Java became popular cause C/C++ programmers could easily use it.
C# became popular cause C/C++/Java programmers could easily use 
it.


D is gradually becoming popular cause C/C++/Java/C# programmers 
can easily use it.

Re: Vision document for H1 2018

[Dylan Graham via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On Sunday, 11 March 2018 at 01:21:27 UTC, psychoticRabbit wrote:

On Sunday, 11 March 2018 at 01:06:08 UTC, R wrote:


Point to the wall on the left side. That is what your talking 
to. D its focus on C++ as a bad plan has been made pushed by 
many people ( lots who left ). Its like asking Go for Generics.


And its very nice to see the "71% in the poll do not want 
BetterC", well, screw them comment. So what is the point again 
by asking people opinions? And sure, BetterC can be reused to 
improve the D core but that is not what people want NOW. And 
yet, its a priority when 71% say its not!


D simply is not equipped for dealing with people who come from 
languages like C#, Ruby, PHP, Python, ... because too many 
people here are C++ old timers ( yes, there are exceptions ) 
and they only think in that direction.

There is a lesson the be learned in this somewhere...



Again, D is not run by some corporation.

Nor is it a democracy - where majority rule. (read this 
sentence over and over till you get it)


The D Language Foundation, being the leading body of D, should 
hold some responsibility to the interests of the majority.


It is not a dictatorship (read this sentence over and over till 
you get it).

Re: Vision document for H1 2018

[psychoticRabbit via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On Sunday, 11 March 2018 at 01:06:08 UTC, R wrote:
 And "scripting" language like PHP, that everybody 
criticizes just keeps growing and gained 11% market share in 
the last 7 years ( at now 83% ). Where as D its gain has been 
minimalist thanks to people leaving almost as fast as it gain.




Well, according to the TIOBE Index, C was the language of 2017.

Java is almost always on top, followed by C, followed closely by 
C++.


And it's not just 'old timers' using those languages... surely.

And scripting language can pretty much replace any other 
scripting language.


It's the 'real' programming languages that matter ;-)

And D's not doing to badly at all...despite betterc

https://www.tiobe.com/tiobe-index/d/

(although I wonder what happended back in 2009 ??)

Re: Vision document for H1 2018

[Dylan Graham via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On Sunday, 11 March 2018 at 01:10:28 UTC, psychoticRabbit wrote:

On Sunday, 11 March 2018 at 00:36:19 UTC, Dylan Graham wrote:


Every day D becomes more like C++ 2.0, why can't it just be D?


Oddly enough, I think this is D's strength.


I really don't.

Golang tried to draw the line, and look where that got it. Now 
it's a limited language for a specific domain  (at least until 
Go 3.0).


Rust decided (and Go to some extent), to introduce foreign 
syntax that was vastly different to what the majority of 
programmers are familiar with, and, it makes it difficult to 
transistion to because its syntax is so unlike the syntax most 
people will continue to have to work with.


D's strength, is that most C/C++/Java/C# programmers can just 
jump right in and use it. And, they can continue to go back and 
forth without syntax related psychosis developing.


betterc is just another way of supporting that crowd..and it's 
a very big crowd.


Yeah, 29% of the crowd.

Your problem is not betterc, but something else. So focus on 
that instead.


You're right, my problem isn't BetterC, it's the fact that 
Foundation can't get its priorities right. BetterC is a symptom.


And personally, depending on the problem, C# is better to 
program in than D. I still don't know why C# programmers are 
willing to give up C# and prefer to use D.

C# is vastly surperior for what it does.


I'm my current use-case, D is 'vastly superior'. I wouldn't have 
switched to D if there was no reason to.



D is also particulary useful for some problems.

Better to use both, not one or the other.

Thanks to not being Go or Rust, you can do that - cause 
concepts, syntax  etc, are really compatible with both.


I'm not sure what you mean at that last sentence.

Re: Vision document for H1 2018

[psychoticRabbit via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On Sunday, 11 March 2018 at 01:06:08 UTC, R wrote:


Point to the wall on the left side. That is what your talking 
to. D its focus on C++ as a bad plan has been made pushed by 
many people ( lots who left ). Its like asking Go for Generics.


And its very nice to see the "71% in the poll do not want 
BetterC", well, screw them comment. So what is the point again 
by asking people opinions? And sure, BetterC can be reused to 
improve the D core but that is not what people want NOW. And 
yet, its a priority when 71% say its not!


D simply is not equipped for dealing with people who come from 
languages like C#, Ruby, PHP, Python, ... because too many 
people here are C++ old timers ( yes, there are exceptions ) 
and they only think in that direction.

There is a lesson the be learned in this somewhere...



Again, D is not run by some corporation.

Nor is it a democracy - where majority rule. (read this sentence 
over and over till you get it)


It's a language that develops because people are sufficiently 
motivated to put in the time to develop what interests them.


Have your say and leave it at that. Stop attacking the work 
others are doing.


And stop your discriminatory use of the phrase 'old timers'.

Re: Vision document for H1 2018

[Dylan Graham via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On Sunday, 11 March 2018 at 01:06:08 UTC, R wrote:

On Sunday, 11 March 2018 at 00:36:19 UTC, Dylan Graham wrote:
Well, no. I'm more concerned with the fact that the D Language 
Foundation is focused on BetterC, yet does not mention DLLs at 
all.


For God's sake, if D is the future, why does it continue to 
leech off C/C++? Other languages like Rust and C# only have 
basic function calling C (FFI/PInvoke) yet are way more 
popular. I get the feeling that most of the C++ programmers 
who would come to D have already done so.


The most I'll ever need of interfacing with C and C++ is to be 
able to call their functions from D. I've no reason for 
BetterC.


And what's with the language design, anyway? D has been 
designed with features that C++ programmers don't want, then 
now the D Language Foundation is wasting effort to change the 
language to rope those programmers in? If D was meant to be 
C++ 2.0, shouldn't it have been designed that way from the 
start?


I came to D from a C# background. I was looking a language 
that had a GC, was awesome to program in and was very fast. 
Why can't D own up to these facts, rather than becoming a 
leech of C++?


Every day D becomes more like C++ 2.0, why can't it just be D?


Point to the wall on the left side. That is what your talking 
to. D its focus on C++ as a bad plan has been made pushed by 
many people ( lots who left ). Its like asking Go for Generics.


Yeah. It quite seems like that. Maybe after BetterC will the 
foundation get its priorities right.


And its very nice to see the "71% in the poll do not want 
BetterC", well, screw them comment. So what is the point again 
by asking people opinions? And sure, BetterC can be reused to 
improve the D core but that is not what people want NOW. And 
yet, its a priority when 71% say its not!


Didn't BetterC start before the poll was issued? I hope that more 
polls like this are created in the future so that the leadership 
knows where it's priorities are based upon community demands.


D simply is not equipped for dealing with people who come from 
languages like C#, Ruby, PHP, Python, ... because too many 
people here are C++ old timers ( yes, there are exceptions ) 
and they only think in that direction.


Kind of ironic when D keeps pushing for more features hoping 
that it will attract C++ developers and the young kid on the 
block Rust is already eating up that market. And "scripting" 
language like PHP, that everybody criticizes just keeps growing 
and gained 11% market share in the last 7 years ( at now 83% ). 
Where as D its gain has been minimalist thanks to people 
leaving almost as fast as it gain.


There is a lesson the be learned in this somewhere...


I wholeheartedly agree, but I believe this direction is because 
that the "C++ old timers" are in the leadership. I don't think 
there are "too many" in the community.


I also wish to point out that I'm not attacking Walter or Alex; I 
love the language they've created, but I'm fairly annoyed with 
their allocation of resources. They need to stick by the language 
they've created.

Re: Vision document for H1 2018

[psychoticRabbit via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On Sunday, 11 March 2018 at 00:36:19 UTC, Dylan Graham wrote:


Every day D becomes more like C++ 2.0, why can't it just be D?


Oddly enough, I think this is D's strength.

Golang tried to draw the line, and look where that got it. Now 
it's a limited language for a specific domain  (at least until Go 
3.0).


Rust decided (and Go to some extent), to introduce foreign syntax 
that was vastly different to what the majority of programmers are 
familiar with, and, it makes it difficult to transistion to 
because its syntax is so unlike the syntax most people will 
continue to have to work with.


D's strength, is that most C/C++/Java/C# programmers can just 
jump right in and use it. And, they can continue to go back and 
forth without syntax related psychosis developing.


betterc is just another way of supporting that crowd..and it's a 
very big crowd.


Your problem is not betterc, but something else. So focus on that 
instead.


And personally, depending on the problem, C# is better to program 
in than D. I still don't know why C# programmers are willing to 
give up C# and prefer to use D.

C# is vastly surperior for what it does.

D is also particulary useful for some problems.

Better to use both, not one or the other.

Thanks to not being Go or Rust, you can do that - cause concepts, 
syntax  etc, are really compatible with both.

Re: Vision document for H1 2018

[R via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On Sunday, 11 March 2018 at 00:36:19 UTC, Dylan Graham wrote:
Well, no. I'm more concerned with the fact that the D Language 
Foundation is focused on BetterC, yet does not mention DLLs at 
all.


For God's sake, if D is the future, why does it continue to 
leech off C/C++? Other languages like Rust and C# only have 
basic function calling C (FFI/PInvoke) yet are way more 
popular. I get the feeling that most of the C++ programmers who 
would come to D have already done so.


The most I'll ever need of interfacing with C and C++ is to be 
able to call their functions from D. I've no reason for BetterC.


And what's with the language design, anyway? D has been 
designed with features that C++ programmers don't want, then 
now the D Language Foundation is wasting effort to change the 
language to rope those programmers in? If D was meant to be C++ 
2.0, shouldn't it have been designed that way from the start?


I came to D from a C# background. I was looking a language that 
had a GC, was awesome to program in and was very fast. Why 
can't D own up to these facts, rather than becoming a leech of 
C++?


Every day D becomes more like C++ 2.0, why can't it just be D?


Point to the wall on the left side. That is what your talking to. 
D its focus on C++ as a bad plan has been made pushed by many 
people ( lots who left ). Its like asking Go for Generics.


And its very nice to see the "71% in the poll do not want 
BetterC", well, screw them comment. So what is the point again by 
asking people opinions? And sure, BetterC can be reused to 
improve the D core but that is not what people want NOW. And yet, 
its a priority when 71% say its not!


D simply is not equipped for dealing with people who come from 
languages like C#, Ruby, PHP, Python, ... because too many people 
here are C++ old timers ( yes, there are exceptions ) and they 
only think in that direction.


Kind of ironic when D keeps pushing for more features hoping that 
it will attract C++ developers and the young kid on the block 
Rust is already eating up that market. And "scripting" language 
like PHP, that everybody criticizes just keeps growing and gained 
11% market share in the last 7 years ( at now 83% ). Where as D 
its gain has been minimalist thanks to people leaving almost as 
fast as it gain.


There is a lesson the be learned in this somewhere...

Re: Vision document for H1 2018

[Dylan Graham via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On Sunday, 11 March 2018 at 00:36:19 UTC, Dylan Graham wrote:
On Saturday, 10 March 2018 at 11:07:56 UTC, psychoticRabbit 
wrote:

On Saturday, 10 March 2018 at 10:47:09 UTC, Dylan Graham wrote:

[Omitted]


I also would like to point out that I don't care if some 
open-source developers decide to create BetterC in their free 
time. More power to them. It doesn't concern me.


What does concern me is that BetterC is the focus of the *D 
Language Foundation*. Why isn't interfacing with D more important?


I'm becoming more and more skeptical of the future of D.

Re: Vision document for H1 2018

[Dylan Graham via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On Saturday, 10 March 2018 at 11:07:56 UTC, psychoticRabbit wrote:

On Saturday, 10 March 2018 at 10:47:09 UTC, Dylan Graham wrote:


Yeah. Why should D worry about tying itself into C when it 
can't even interface with itself through DLLs?


A reasonable point.

But.. in any case.. people work on what they are motivated to 
work on.


That's really all there is to it.

That's how the open source community works.

Top down, corporate direction, simply does not apply here.

One day you (or some other D programmer) might need betterC - 
who knows - and it'll be there for you - cause someone else was 
motivated to do it.


Well, no. I'm more concerned with the fact that the D Language 
Foundation is focused on BetterC, yet does not mention DLLs at 
all.


For God's sake, if D is the future, why does it continue to leech 
off C/C++? Other languages like Rust and C# only have basic 
function calling C (FFI/PInvoke) yet are way more popular. I get 
the feeling that most of the C++ programmers who would come to D 
have already done so.


The most I'll ever need of interfacing with C and C++ is to be 
able to call their functions from D. I've no reason for BetterC.


And what's with the language design, anyway? D has been designed 
with features that C++ programmers don't want, then now the D 
Language Foundation is wasting effort to change the language to 
rope those programmers in? If D was meant to be C++ 2.0, 
shouldn't it have been designed that way from the start?


I came to D from a C# background. I was looking a language that 
had a GC, was awesome to program in and was very fast. Why can't 
D own up to these facts, rather than becoming a leech of C++?


Every day D becomes more like C++ 2.0, why can't it just be D?

Re: Vision document for H1 2018

[Meta via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On Friday, 9 March 2018 at 21:43:53 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu 
wrote:
Hello, the vision document of the Founation for the first six 
months of 2018 is here:


https://wiki.dlang.org/Vision/2018H1

In addition to the expected items, we have a new top-level 
priority - locking down the language definition. This is in 
recognition of the fact that we need a precise definition of 
the language going forward.



Thanks,

Andrei


Establish the DIP as a clear, solid means to get a language 
enhancement going


Very excited about this one. Hopefully some faith can be restored 
in the process.

Re: dpldocs now has cross-package search (experimental)

[Adam D. Ruppe via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On Saturday, 10 March 2018 at 16:49:44 UTC, Martin Tschierschke 
wrote:
There is a bug, I just tried "mouse event" in the search box 
and got a strange result.


oh yikes a recursive javascript redirect. fixed that.

The search still kinda sucks, but it is better than nothing. If 
you put in a full name, it should be the first result. Otherwise, 
it tries a full text search that is a bit spotty.

Re: dpldocs now has cross-package search (experimental)

[Martin Tschierschke via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On Saturday, 10 March 2018 at 16:35:56 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Saturday, 10 March 2018 at 16:03:39 UTC, Martin Tschierschke 
wrote:
Cool, and if you are in the mood of using only arsd, for 
example find an example for a trigger on mouse request:

http://search.dpldocs.info/search-docs.html?searchTerm=arsd+mouse


Yup.

You can also search inside a particular package/version by 
going to it and using the upper right search box there.


http://arsd-official.dpldocs.info/v2.0.0/search-results.html#!mouse

for example will just search v2.0.0 of the arsd-official 
package.



There is a bug, I just tried "mouse event" in the search box and 
got a strange result.

Re: dpldocs now has cross-package search (experimental)

[Adam D. Ruppe via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On Saturday, 10 March 2018 at 16:03:39 UTC, Martin Tschierschke 
wrote:
Cool, and if you are in the mood of using only arsd, for 
example find an example for a trigger on mouse request:

http://search.dpldocs.info/search-docs.html?searchTerm=arsd+mouse


Yup.

You can also search inside a particular package/version by going 
to it and using the upper right search box there.


http://arsd-official.dpldocs.info/v2.0.0/search-results.html#!mouse

for example will just search v2.0.0 of the arsd-official package.


and i just hit a huge module on my thing:
core.exception.OutOfMemoryError@core/exception.d(702): Memory 
allocation failed


uh oh, the search went up to 3.2 GB now. That shouldn't have 
happened - even the beefier hardware can't support all that!


So I still need to do some more optimizations before promoting 
this from "experimental" but we'll get there.

Re: dpldocs now has cross-package search (experimental)

[Martin Tschierschke via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On Saturday, 10 March 2018 at 00:09:18 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:

Looking for http libs? Behold:

http://search.dpldocs.info/?q=http


Oh my. Eats 2 GB of ram but with the newest patrons 
 I sprung for the beefier 
host. Only searches projects already on the site as of the 
beginning of each day (it loads what has already been 
generated, it doesn't seek to generate more at this time).


It loads one of my own deprecated modules as the top result. 
lol, it could still use some work. But it is started now.


Cool, and if you are in the mood of using only arsd, for example 
find an example for a trigger on mouse request:

http://search.dpldocs.info/search-docs.html?searchTerm=arsd+mouse

Re: State of D 2018 Survey

[rumbu via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On Saturday, 10 March 2018 at 14:24:42 UTC, Johannes Loher wrote:

Is there a way to directly view the results without taking the 
survey again?


https://dlang.typeform.com/report/H1GTak/PY9NhHkcBFG0t6ig

Re: Vibe.d web interface tutorial

[Martin Tschierschke via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On Friday, 9 March 2018 at 16:34:52 UTC, aberba wrote:

On Friday, 9 March 2018 at 16:32:28 UTC, aberba wrote:

New blog post for the learning audience

aberba.com/2018/using-vibe-d-web-interface


http://aberba.com/2018/using-vibe-d-web-interface


Thank you! I linke it.

Re: State of D 2018 Survey

[Johannes Loher via Digitalmars-d-announce]

Am 28.02.2018 um 14:41 schrieb Mike Parker:
> About a month ago, Sebastian Wilzbach sent an email out to a few of the
> core D folks asking for feedback on a survey he had put together. He
> thought it would be useful for the Foundation to use in order to make
> decisions about where to expend development efforts. Eventually Andrei
> gave his stamp of approval, the survey questions were tweaked, and then
> it was ready to roll.
> 
> Of course I would love for you to read my blog post announcing it, but
> if you want to skip the prose and go straight to the good stuff, here's
> the survey link:
> 
> https://seb134.typeform.com/to/H1GTak
> 
> The blog:
> https://dlang.org/blog/2018/02/28/the-state-of-d-2018-survey/
> 
> Reddit:
> https://www.reddit.com/r/d_language/comments/80w29n/the_state_of_d_2018_survey/
> 

Is there a way to directly view the results without taking the survey again?

Re: Vision document for H1 2018

[Aurélien Plazzotta via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On Saturday, 10 March 2018 at 10:05:49 UTC, rumbu wrote:
On Friday, 9 March 2018 at 21:43:53 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu 
wrote:
Hello, the vision document of the Founation for the first six 
months of 2018 is here:


https://wiki.dlang.org/Vision/2018H1



According to the State of D Survey, 71% of the respondents 
don't care about betterC. Why is betterC on the priority list?


Just ignore it. And don't forget the primary betterC's goal.
It was never designed to please some C developers to take profit 
from D without dealing with D full runtime but to help migrating 
from historical C/C++ compiler backend to a fully D native 
compiler backend.


The objective is to obtain bootstraping and get rid of all other 
language's dependencies, which will be a huge advantage and 
advertising for D use and in extenso, D community and 
penetration-market.


Convincing C developpers to try out betterC is "just" a temporary 
(and positive) side-effect.

Re: Vision document for H1 2018

[psychoticRabbit via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On Saturday, 10 March 2018 at 11:45:25 UTC, rumbu wrote:
I'm talking about the D Foundation priority list, not about the 
open source community surrounding it. I have nothing against 
betterC, the community is free to work on it, but I don't 
understand why it's a *priority* for the D foundation. Is there 
any funding involved requesting explicitly betterC support?


perhaps this question can be one of many, that the community ask 
the members of the D foundation, on stage, during the Q and A at 
the upcoming Dconf ;-)


there will be a roasting.. won't there?

Re: Vision document for H1 2018

[psychoticRabbit via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On Saturday, 10 March 2018 at 11:45:25 UTC, rumbu wrote:


I'm talking about the D Foundation priority list, not about the 
open source community surrounding it. I have nothing against 
betterC, the community is free to work on it, but I don't 
understand why it's a *priority* for the D foundation. Is there 
any funding involved requesting explicitly betterC support?


I think cause interoperating with C/C++, as well as encouraging 
migrating C/C++ code over D..has always been a key objective for 
Andrei and Walter (as least that's the impression I get - as a 
relative newcomer to D).


So I doesn't surprise me that it would be (remain) a priority for 
the D foundation, which they (and others) represent.


All power to em...

Although... I'm just not convinced that C programmers will give 
up C, and C++ programmers will give up C++ ... well... certainly 
I don't see any mass migration on the horizon of my crystal ball.


Everyone will end up programming in C++, Java, or .NET .. says 
the crystal ball.

Re: Vision document for H1 2018

[rumbu via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On Saturday, 10 March 2018 at 11:07:56 UTC, psychoticRabbit wrote:

On Saturday, 10 March 2018 at 10:47:09 UTC, Dylan Graham wrote:


Yeah. Why should D worry about tying itself into C when it 
can't even interface with itself through DLLs?


A reasonable point.

But.. in any case.. people work on what they are motivated to 
work on.


That's really all there is to it.

That's how the open source community works.



I'm talking about the D Foundation priority list, not about the 
open source community surrounding it. I have nothing against 
betterC, the community is free to work on it, but I don't 
understand why it's a *priority* for the D foundation. Is there 
any funding involved requesting explicitly betterC support?

Re: Vision document for H1 2018

[psychoticRabbit via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On Saturday, 10 March 2018 at 10:05:49 UTC, rumbu wrote:


According to the State of D Survey, 71% of the respondents 
don't care about betterC. Why is betterC on the priority list?


who cares what 'the majority' want... I mean really.

stuff em!

(ohh... that was in jest.. don't take that seriously)

Re: Vision document for H1 2018

[Mike Parker via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On Saturday, 10 March 2018 at 10:05:49 UTC, rumbu wrote:



According to the State of D Survey, 71% of the respondents 
don't care about betterC. Why is betterC on the priority list?


1. The vision document was started before the survey and the 
survey isn't closed, so the survey results don't factor into it 
yet.


2. The survey results will serve as a set of guidelines for 
future directions, not as a set of absolute directives. It wasn't 
a controlled survey and it doesn't reflect the entire D community.


3. Work on BetterC was started a long time ago and isn't going to 
be abandoned over night.


If something shows up as high priority in the survey, then it 
makes sense to evaluate its impact and see how we can devote more 
resources to it going forward. If something shows up as low 
priority, then we have to take a number of factors into account, 
(e.g. Is it being worked on already? Are there commercial 
interests who *do* consider it a priority? Etc.).


In other words, when setting goals post-survey, the results will 
factor into the decisions, but they won't necessarily be the 
deciding factor. The survey is a means of getting community input 
in one place, as opposed to scattered across the forums and 
reddit comments.

Re: Vision document for H1 2018

[psychoticRabbit via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On Saturday, 10 March 2018 at 10:47:09 UTC, Dylan Graham wrote:


Yeah. Why should D worry about tying itself into C when it 
can't even interface with itself through DLLs?


A reasonable point.

But.. in any case.. people work on what they are motivated to 
work on.


That's really all there is to it.

That's how the open source community works.

Top down, corporate direction, simply does not apply here.

One day you (or some other D programmer) might need betterC - who 
knows - and it'll be there for you - cause someone else was 
motivated to do it.

Re: Vision document for H1 2018

[Dylan Graham via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On Saturday, 10 March 2018 at 10:05:49 UTC, rumbu wrote:
On Friday, 9 March 2018 at 21:43:53 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu 
wrote:
Hello, the vision document of the Founation for the first six 
months of 2018 is here:


https://wiki.dlang.org/Vision/2018H1



According to the State of D Survey, 71% of the respondents 
don't care about betterC. Why is betterC on the priority list?


Yeah. Why should D worry about tying itself into C when it can't 
even interface with itself through DLLs?

Re: Vision document for H1 2018

[Dukc via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On Saturday, 10 March 2018 at 10:05:49 UTC, rumbu wrote:


According to the State of D Survey, 71% of the respondents 
don't care about betterC. Why is betterC on the priority list?


I believe it's because it's so important for the 29% who care. If 
you're doing an module for project written in another language 
and don't want to introduce DRuntime yet, or are compiling to 
JavaScript for example, --BetterC can be a lot more helpful than 
killing autodecoding or whatever.

Re: Vision document for H1 2018

[rumbu via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On Friday, 9 March 2018 at 21:43:53 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu 
wrote:
Hello, the vision document of the Founation for the first six 
months of 2018 is here:


https://wiki.dlang.org/Vision/2018H1



According to the State of D Survey, 71% of the respondents don't 
care about betterC. Why is betterC on the priority list?

Re: dpldocs now has cross-package search (experimental)

[Nordlöw via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On Saturday, 10 March 2018 at 00:09:18 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:

Looking for http libs? Behold:

http://search.dpldocs.info/?q=http


Nice!