On Thursday, 9 March 2017 at 16:12:46 UTC, bachmeier wrote:
On Thursday, 9 March 2017 at 11:52:42 UTC, thedeemon wrote:
On Wednesday, 8 March 2017 at 20:00:54 UTC, aberba wrote:
[...]
This is mostly a psychological effect of C++ folks having
aversion to any GC.
It is interesting to have wa
On Thursday, 9 March 2017 at 15:54:04 UTC, dewitt wrote:
I don't think the community should think in terms of "threat"
or "competition" I mean languages are basically tools to get a
job done.
Yeah, and that is a trend that is increasing as the cost of
developing new languages are falling. No
On Thursday, 9 March 2017 at 15:54:04 UTC, dewitt wrote:
Also how many times a week can the same questions be asked on
this forum about the same topics? I feel I am re-reading the
same stuff weekly
That's a good sign. It comes with the territory when a language
starts to see serious conside
On Thursday, 9 March 2017 at 11:52:42 UTC, thedeemon wrote:
On Wednesday, 8 March 2017 at 20:00:54 UTC, aberba wrote:
From a technical and experience point of view (those with
experience in large D code-base), how is only D's GC &
optional MMM a significant production-use blocker?
This is mos
On Thursday, 9 March 2017 at 13:36:28 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad
wrote:
On Thursday, 9 March 2017 at 12:27:30 UTC, Guillaume Piolat
wrote:
The competition is clever enough to emphasize that D is 14
years old and has a GC, so they don't even try it.
The competition doesn't smack talk D, I think.
On Thursday, 9 March 2017 at 14:38:32 UTC, Guillaume Piolat wrote:
On Thursday, 9 March 2017 at 14:08:00 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad
wrote:
I don't really want to talk with you.
Whatever suits you, but don't pretend that people that express
views about D online are the competition. They are ove
On Thursday, 9 March 2017 at 14:08:00 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad
wrote:
I am speaking of what they are perceiving not what I think.
They don't perceive D as a threat, why would they feel a need
to smack talk D?
I don't really want to talk with you.
On Thursday, 9 March 2017 at 13:40:09 UTC, Guillaume Piolat wrote:
On Thursday, 9 March 2017 at 13:36:28 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad
wrote:
It's not like D is threat to them anyway.
I'm not sure why you would think that, if anything that
reinforced my point.
I am speaking of what they are p
On Thursday, 9 March 2017 at 13:36:28 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad
wrote:
It's not like D is threat to them anyway.
I'm not sure why you would think that, if anything that
reinforced my point.
On Thursday, 9 March 2017 at 12:27:30 UTC, Guillaume Piolat wrote:
The competition is clever enough to emphasize that D is 14
years old and has a GC, so they don't even try it.
The competition doesn't smack talk D, I think. If they mention D
they tend to do so in a friendly way. It's not like
On Wednesday, 8 March 2017 at 20:00:54 UTC, aberba wrote:
(To make my problem clear, how is D's current state not going
to allow / make it so difficult for developers (who know what
they are doing) to write say Photoshop-scale software:
excluding those *so* realtime use cases?)
Well, I don't
On Thursday, 9 March 2017 at 11:52:42 UTC, thedeemon wrote:
On Wednesday, 8 March 2017 at 20:00:54 UTC, aberba wrote:
From a technical and experience point of view (those with
experience in large D code-base), how is only D's GC &
optional MMM a significant production-use blocker?
This is mos
On Wednesday, 8 March 2017 at 20:00:54 UTC, aberba wrote:
From a technical and experience point of view (those with
experience in large D code-base), how is only D's GC & optional
MMM a significant production-use blocker?
This is mostly a psychological effect of C++ folks having
aversion to a
On Thursday, 9 March 2017 at 08:57:39 UTC, XavierAP wrote:
Just like Andrei at Facebook.
Just a FYI, Andrei *used* to work at Facebook.
https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/3ioy9b/andrei_alexandrescu_c_guru_leaves_facebook_to/
On Thursday, 9 March 2017 at 07:24:12 UTC, aberba wrote:
So technically and from experience, the current state of D is
not the primary issue?
I don't have enough experience with D yet, hopefully someone else
can tell you better. But my two cents.
"Current state" is a very general thing. Goin
On Wednesday, 8 March 2017 at 22:13:26 UTC, XavierAP wrote:
On Wednesday, 8 March 2017 at 20:00:54 UTC, aberba wrote:
(To make my problem clear, how is D's current state not going
to allow / make it so difficult for developers (who know what
they are doing) to write say Photoshop-scale softw
On Wednesday, 8 March 2017 at 20:00:54 UTC, aberba wrote:
(To make my problem clear, how is D's current state not going
to allow / make it so difficult for developers (who know what
they are doing) to write say Photoshop-scale software:
This is probably a common question, and it would be ea
On Wednesday, 8 March 2017 at 20:00:54 UTC, aberba wrote:
I don't really have much experience with large code base, so
spare me.
From a technical and experience point of view (those with
experience in large D code-base), how is only D's GC & optional
MMM a significant production-use blocker?
I don't really have much experience with large code base, so
spare me.
From a technical and experience point of view (those with
experience in large D code-base), how is only D's GC & optional
MMM a significant production-use blocker?
(To make my problem clear, how is D's current state not
19 matches
Mail list logo
