Re: Novel list

2015-03-26 Thread ketmar via Digitalmars-d
On Thu, 26 Mar 2015 01:29:40 +, lobo wrote: On Wednesday, 25 March 2015 at 23:08:52 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: On 3/25/2015 7:52 AM, wobbles wrote: On Wednesday, 25 March 2015 at 12:21:32 UTC, Martin Krejcirik wrote: On Wednesday, 25 March 2015 at 12:01:15 UTC, wobbles wrote: The DOES

Novel list

2015-03-25 Thread Russel Winder via Digitalmars-d
http://hammerprinciple.com/therighttool/statements/this-language-is-best-for-very-large-projects -- Russel. = Dr Russel Winder t: +44 20 7585 2200 voip: sip:russel.win...@ekiga.net 41 Buckmaster Roadm: +44

Re: Novel list

2015-03-25 Thread Rikki Cattermole via Digitalmars-d
On 25/03/2015 10:29 p.m., Russel Winder via Digitalmars-d wrote: http://hammerprinciple.com/therighttool/statements/this-language-is-best-for-very-large-projects Huh, we come off pretty good. Makes me kinda question their research techniques.

Re: Novel list

2015-03-25 Thread Kagamin via Digitalmars-d
or http://hammerprinciple.com/therighttool/statements/when-i-write-code-in-this-language-i-can-be-very-s

Re: Novel list

2015-03-25 Thread Martin Krejcirik via Digitalmars-d
On Wednesday, 25 March 2015 at 12:01:15 UTC, wobbles wrote: The DOES POORLY AT... column is good reading here for how D could improve ( though some of the comments are stupid. D has an annoying syntax!?) doeas poorly at annoying syntax = not annoying syntax

Re: Novel list

2015-03-25 Thread Dave S via Digitalmars-d
On Wednesday, 25 March 2015 at 12:21:32 UTC, Martin Krejcirik wrote: On Wednesday, 25 March 2015 at 12:01:15 UTC, wobbles wrote: The DOES POORLY AT... column is good reading here for how D could improve ( though some of the comments are stupid. D has an annoying syntax!?) doeas poorly at

Re: Novel list

2015-03-25 Thread Dejan Lekic via Digitalmars-d
On Wednesday, 25 March 2015 at 09:29:40 UTC, Russel Winder wrote: http://hammerprinciple.com/therighttool/statements/this-language-is-best-for-very-large-projects Nice one - I wonder what people answered to PROGRAMS WRITTEN IN THIS LANGUAGE WILL USUALLY WORK IN FUTURE VERSIONS OF THE

Re: Novel list

2015-03-25 Thread via Digitalmars-d
Ugh, I haven't looked too closely at this, but they apparently also ignore those that are undecided? Meaning that numbers like 90% meant X actually could be 9% meant X and 90% are undecided. Looks like entertainment.

Re: Novel list

2015-03-25 Thread via Digitalmars-d
On Wednesday, 25 March 2015 at 09:47:57 UTC, Rikki Cattermole wrote: On 25/03/2015 10:29 p.m., Russel Winder via Digitalmars-d wrote: http://hammerprinciple.com/therighttool/statements/this-language-is-best-for-very-large-projects Huh, we come off pretty good. Makes me kinda question their

Re: Novel list

2015-03-25 Thread weaselcat via Digitalmars-d
On Wednesday, 25 March 2015 at 09:29:40 UTC, Russel Winder wrote: http://hammerprinciple.com/therighttool/statements/this-language-is-best-for-very-large-projects The D comparison with C++ is interesting, it sums up why I use D.

Re: Novel list

2015-03-25 Thread Alex Parrill via Digitalmars-d
On Wednesday, 25 March 2015 at 12:21:32 UTC, Martin Krejcirik wrote: doeas poorly at annoying syntax = not annoying syntax Yea, these charts are confusing, with the double negatives and the green up arrows next to negative aspects. A pro/con list would be much more clear.

Re: Novel list

2015-03-25 Thread wobbles via Digitalmars-d
On Wednesday, 25 March 2015 at 12:21:32 UTC, Martin Krejcirik wrote: On Wednesday, 25 March 2015 at 12:01:15 UTC, wobbles wrote: The DOES POORLY AT... column is good reading here for how D could improve ( though some of the comments are stupid. D has an annoying syntax!?) doeas poorly at

Re: Novel list

2015-03-25 Thread weaselcat via Digitalmars-d
On Wednesday, 25 March 2015 at 19:41:38 UTC, Mengu wrote: On Wednesday, 25 March 2015 at 15:53:34 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote: Ugh, I haven't looked too closely at this, but they apparently also ignore those that are undecided? Meaning that numbers like 90% meant X actually could be 9%

Re: Novel list

2015-03-25 Thread Mengu via Digitalmars-d
On Wednesday, 25 March 2015 at 15:53:34 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote: Ugh, I haven't looked too closely at this, but they apparently also ignore those that are undecided? Meaning that numbers like 90% meant X actually could be 9% meant X and 90% are undecided. Looks like entertainment.

Re: Novel list

2015-03-25 Thread Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d
On 3/25/2015 7:52 AM, wobbles wrote: On Wednesday, 25 March 2015 at 12:21:32 UTC, Martin Krejcirik wrote: On Wednesday, 25 March 2015 at 12:01:15 UTC, wobbles wrote: The DOES POORLY AT... column is good reading here for how D could improve ( though some of the comments are stupid. D has an

Re: Novel list

2015-03-25 Thread lobo via Digitalmars-d
On Wednesday, 25 March 2015 at 23:08:52 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: On 3/25/2015 7:52 AM, wobbles wrote: On Wednesday, 25 March 2015 at 12:21:32 UTC, Martin Krejcirik wrote: On Wednesday, 25 March 2015 at 12:01:15 UTC, wobbles wrote: The DOES POORLY AT... column is good reading here for how D

Re: Novel list

2015-03-25 Thread wobbles via Digitalmars-d
On Wednesday, 25 March 2015 at 09:47:24 UTC, Kagamin wrote: or http://hammerprinciple.com/therighttool/statements/when-i-write-code-in-this-language-i-can-be-very-s Interesting site. The DOES POORLY AT... column is good reading here for how D could improve ( though some of the comments are