On Tuesday, 4 September 2018 at 13:34:03 UTC,
TheSixMillionDollarMan wrote:
I think D's 'core' problem, is that it's trying to compete
with, what are now, widely used, powerful, and well supported
languages, with sophisticate ecosystems in place already.
C/C++/Java/C# .. just for beginners.
On Friday, 24 August 2018 at 13:21:25 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Friday, August 24, 2018 6:05:40 AM MDT Mike Franklin via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
> You're basically trying to bypass the OS' public API if
> you're trying to bypass libc.
No I'm trying to bypass libc and use the OS API
The first search engines were created in 1993, google came
along in 1998 after at least two dozen others in that list, and
didn't make a profit till 2001. Some of those early competitors
were giant "billion dollar global companies," yet it's google
that dominates the web search engine market
On Tuesday, 4 September 2018 at 14:23:33 UTC, Joakim wrote:
The first search engines were created in 1993, google came
along in 1998 after at least two dozen others in that list, and
didn't make a profit till 2001. Some of those early competitors
were giant "billion dollar global companies,"
On Tuesday, 4 September 2018 at 13:34:03 UTC,
TheSixMillionDollarMan wrote:
On Tuesday, 4 September 2018 at 01:36:53 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 18:26:57 UTC, Chris wrote:
And of course, low manpower and funding aren't the complete
picture. Management also play a
On Tuesday, 4 September 2018 at 01:36:53 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 18:26:57 UTC, Chris wrote:
And of course, low manpower and funding aren't the complete
picture. Management also play a role. Both Walter and Andrei
have freely admitted they are not managers and
On Tuesday, 4 September 2018 at 09:40:23 UTC, Ecstatic Coder
wrote:
But it seems that the latest version of "std.file.copy" now
completely ignores the "PreserveAttributes.no" argument on
Windows, which made recent Windows builds of Resync fail on
read-only files.
Very typical...
While D
On Thursday, 23 August 2018 at 03:50:44 UTC, Shachar Shemesh
wrote:
On 22/08/18 21:34, Ali wrote:
On Wednesday, 22 August 2018 at 17:42:56 UTC, Joakim wrote:
Pretty positive overall, and the negatives he mentions are
fairly obvious to anyone paying attention.
Yea, I agree, the negatives are
On Tuesday, 4 September 2018 at 05:38:49 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
On 4 September 2018 at 04:19, Laeeth Isharc via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 16:07:21 UTC, RhyS wrote:
A good example being the resources going into DMD, LDC,
GDC... 3 Compilers for one language, when
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 16:41:32 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
15 years ago, people were complaining that there was only one D
compiler. It is ironic that people now complain that there's
too many.
One needs multiple implementations to confirm the accuracy of the
language specification. D
On Tuesday, 4 September 2018 at 01:36:53 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 18:26:57 UTC, Chris wrote:
I think this sort of misunderstanding is the source of a lot
of friction on this forum. Some users think (or in my case:
thought) that D will be a sound and stable
On Tuesday, 4 September 2018 at 01:36:53 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
D is not a petri dish for testing ideas. It's not an experiment.
Well, the general consensus for programming languages is that it
a language is experimental
(or proprietary) until it is fully specced out as a stable
formal
On Tuesday, 4 September 2018 at 02:19:20 UTC, Laeeth Isharc wrote:
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 16:07:21 UTC, RhyS wrote:
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 15:41:48 UTC, Laurent Tréguier
wrote:
Yes. It almost sounds like a smooth experience would be a bad
thing to have, especially with the
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 22:30:47 UTC, Chris wrote:
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 18:52:45 UTC, Laurent Tréguier
wrote:
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 18:26:57 UTC, Chris wrote:
it should come with a warning label that says "D is in many
parts still at an experimental stage and ships
On 4 September 2018 at 04:19, Laeeth Isharc via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
> On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 16:07:21 UTC, RhyS wrote:
>>
>> A good example being the resources going into DMD, LDC, GDC... 3 Compilers
>> for one language, when even well funded languages stick to one compiler. And
>> now
On Mon, 3 Sep 2018 at 19:35, Laeeth Isharc via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
>
> On Tuesday, 4 September 2018 at 02:24:25 UTC, Manu wrote:
> > On Mon, 3 Sep 2018 at 18:45, Laeeth Isharc via Digitalmars-d
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 17:15:03 UTC, Laurent Tréguier
> >> wrote:
> >> >
On Tuesday, 4 September 2018 at 02:24:25 UTC, Manu wrote:
On Mon, 3 Sep 2018 at 18:45, Laeeth Isharc via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 17:15:03 UTC, Laurent Tréguier
wrote:
> On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 16:55:10 UTC, Jonathan M
> Davis wrote:
>> Most of the work
On Mon, 3 Sep 2018 at 18:45, Laeeth Isharc via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
>
> On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 17:15:03 UTC, Laurent Tréguier
> wrote:
> > On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 16:55:10 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
> > wrote:
> >> Most of the work that gets done is the stuff that the folks
> >>
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 16:07:21 UTC, RhyS wrote:
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 15:41:48 UTC, Laurent Tréguier
wrote:
Yes. It almost sounds like a smooth experience would be a bad
thing to have, especially with the classic "you don't need an
IDE anyway" speech. Editing experience seems
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 17:15:03 UTC, Laurent Tréguier
wrote:
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 16:55:10 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
Most of the work that gets done is the stuff that the folks
contributing think is the most important - frequently what is
most important for them for what
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 18:26:57 UTC, Chris wrote:
I think this sort of misunderstanding is the source of a lot of
friction on this forum. Some users think (or in my case:
thought) that D will be a sound and stable language one day, a
language they can use for loads of stuff, while
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 18:52:45 UTC, Laurent Tréguier
wrote:
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 18:26:57 UTC, Chris wrote:
it should come with a warning label that says "D is in many
parts still at an experimental stage and ships with no
guarantees whatsoever. Use at your own risk."
Well
On Monday, September 3, 2018 12:26:57 PM MDT Chris via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> There is no real plan and
> only problems that someone deems interesting or challenging at a
> given moment are tackled. If they solve a problem for a lot of
> users, it's only a side effect. The advent of a D Foundation
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 14:26:46 UTC, Laeeth Isharc wrote:
I just spoke with Dicebot about work stuff. He incidentally
mentioned what I said before based on my impressions. The
people doing work with a language have better things to do than
spend a lot of time on forums. And I think
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 14:26:46 UTC, Laeeth Isharc wrote:
I just spoke with Dicebot about work stuff. He incidentally
mentioned what I said before based on my impressions. The
people doing work with a language have better things to do than
spend a lot of time on forums. And I think
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 18:26:57 UTC, Chris wrote:
it should come with a warning label that says "D is in many
parts still at an experimental stage and ships with no
guarantees whatsoever. Use at your own risk."
Well it comes with the Boost license that says: `THE SOFTWARE IS
PROVIDED
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 16:55:10 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
Most of the work that gets done is the stuff that the folks
contributing think is the most important - frequently what is
most important for them for what they do, and very few (if any)
of the major contributors use or care
On Monday, September 3, 2018 11:15:03 AM MDT Laurent Tréguier via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
> It just baffles me a bit to see the state of D in this
> department, when languages like Go or Rust (hooray for yet
> another comparison to Go and Rust) are a lot younger, but already
> have what looks like
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 16:55:10 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
Most of the work that gets done is the stuff that the folks
contributing think is the most important - frequently what is
most important for them for what they do, and very few (if any)
of the major contributors use or care
On Monday, September 3, 2018 9:41:48 AM MDT Laurent Tréguier via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 15:23:12 UTC, Chris wrote:
> > On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 14:26:46 UTC, Laeeth Isharc
> >
> > wrote:
> >> On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 11:32:42 UTC, Chris wrote:
> >>>
On 3 September 2018 at 18:07, RhyS via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
>
> Too much resources split among too many distributions, graphical desktops
> etc. Choice is good but too much choice means projects are starved for
> resources, comparability are issues, bugs are even more present, ...
>
> A good
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 15:41:48 UTC, Laurent Tréguier
wrote:
Yes. It almost sounds like a smooth experience would be a bad
thing to have, especially with the classic "you don't need an
IDE anyway" speech. Editing experience seems often dismissed as
unimportant, when it's one of the
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 15:23:12 UTC, Chris wrote:
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 14:26:46 UTC, Laeeth Isharc
wrote:
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 11:32:42 UTC, Chris wrote:
[...]
D has never been about smooth experiences! That's a
commercial benefit if you think that hormesis
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 14:26:46 UTC, Laeeth Isharc wrote:
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 11:32:42 UTC, Chris wrote:
[...]
D has never been about smooth experiences! That's a commercial
benefit if you think that hormesis brings benefits and you are
not looking for programmers of
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 11:32:42 UTC, Chris wrote:
On Sunday, 2 September 2018 at 12:07:17 UTC, Laeeth Isharc
wrote:
That's why the people that adopt D will inordinately be
principals not agents in the beginning. They will either be
residual claimants on earnings or will have
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 11:32:42 UTC, Chris wrote:
On Sunday, 2 September 2018 at 12:07:17 UTC, Laeeth Isharc
wrote:
That's why the people that adopt D will inordinately be
principals not agents in the beginning. They will either be
residual claimants on earnings or will have
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 06:29:02 UTC, Pjotr Prins wrote:
One thing I want to add that we ought to be appreciative of the
work people put in - much of it in their spare time. I wonder
if W and others sometimes despair for the lack of
appreciation they get. Guido van Rossum burning out
On Monday, 3 September 2018 at 06:29:02 UTC, Pjotr Prins wrote:
Hear, hear!
Even though some languages like Julia, Rust and Go are much
better funded than D - and their creators have excellent taste
in different ways - they still have to go through similar
evolutionary steps. There is no
On Sunday, 2 September 2018 at 12:07:17 UTC, Laeeth Isharc wrote:
That's why the people that adopt D will inordinately be
principals not agents in the beginning. They will either be
residual claimants on earnings or will have acquired the
authority to make decisions without persuading a
On Sunday, 2 September 2018 at 12:07:17 UTC, Laeeth Isharc wrote:
I've only been programming since 1983 so I had the benefit of
high level languages like BBC BASIC, C, a Forth I wrote myself,
and Modula 3. And although I had to write a disassembler at
least I has assemblers built in.
On Sunday, 2 September 2018 at 14:48:34 UTC, lurker wrote:
after the beta i tried it the final again - just to be fair.
1.) install d, install visual d.
2.) trying to to look at options under visual d without a
project crashes VS2017 - latest
service pack.
3.) VS2017 - displays a problem
On Sunday, 2 September 2018 at 14:48:34 UTC, lurker wrote:
after the beta i tried it the final again - just to be fair.
1.) install d, install visual d.
2.) trying to to look at options under visual d without a
project crashes VS2017 - latest
service pack.
3.) VS2017 - displays a problem
On Sun, 2 Sep 2018 at 16:05, Andre Pany via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
>
> On Sunday, 2 September 2018 at 14:48:34 UTC, lurker wrote:
> > after the beta i tried it the final again - just to be fair.
> >
> > 1.) install d, install visual d.
> > 2.) trying to to look at options under visual d without a
>
On Sunday, 2 September 2018 at 14:48:34 UTC, lurker wrote:
after the beta i tried it the final again - just to be fair.
1.) install d, install visual d.
2.) trying to to look at options under visual d without a
project crashes VS2017 - latest
service pack.
3.) VS2017 - displays a problem
On Sunday, 2 September 2018 at 14:48:34 UTC, lurker wrote:
after the beta i tried it the final again - just to be fair.
1.) install d, install visual d.
2.) trying to to look at options under visual d without a
project crashes VS2017 - latest
service pack.
3.) VS2017 - displays a problem
after the beta i tried it the final again - just to be fair.
1.) install d, install visual d.
2.) trying to to look at options under visual d without a project
crashes VS2017 - latest
service pack.
3.) VS2017 - displays a problem on startup
4.) creating the dummy project - compile for x64.
On Saturday, 1 September 2018 at 12:33:49 UTC, rjframe wrote:
On Thu, 23 Aug 2018 15:35:45 +, Joakim wrote:
* Language complexity
Raise your hand if you know how a class with both opApply and
the
get/next/end functions behaves when you pass it to foreach.
How about a struct? Does it
On Saturday, 1 September 2018 at 18:35:30 UTC,
TheSixMillionDollarMan wrote:
On Saturday, 1 September 2018 at 12:33:49 UTC, rjframe wrote:
[...]
Stroustrup also said, that "achieving any degree of
compatibility [with C/C++] is very hard, as the C/C++
experience shows."
(reference =>
On Saturday, 1 September 2018 at 12:33:49 UTC, rjframe wrote:
C++ is sometimes used for projects in which Stroustrup would
say it's obviously the wrong language for the job.
D is far more likely to require justification based on
technical merit. If D becomes another C++, why bother taking a
On Thu, 23 Aug 2018 14:29:23 +, bachmeier wrote:
> Weka is an awesome project, but I don't know that most people
> considering D should use your experience as the basis of their decision.
> At least in my areas, I expect considerable growth in the usage of D
> over the next 10 years. Maybe it
On Thu, 23 Aug 2018 15:35:45 +, Joakim wrote:
>> * Language complexity
>>
>> Raise your hand if you know how a class with both opApply and the
>> get/next/end functions behaves when you pass it to foreach.
>> How about a struct? Does it matter if it allows copying or not?
>>
>> The language
On Tuesday, 28 August 2018 at 13:39:40 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
On Thursday, 23 August 2018 at 15:35:45 UTC, Joakim wrote:
On Thursday, 23 August 2018 at 07:37:07 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
On Thursday, 23 August 2018 at 06:58:13 UTC, Joakim wrote:
On Thursday, 23 August 2018 at 03:50:44 UTC,
On Thursday, 23 August 2018 at 15:35:45 UTC, Joakim wrote:
On Thursday, 23 August 2018 at 07:37:07 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
On Thursday, 23 August 2018 at 06:58:13 UTC, Joakim wrote:
On Thursday, 23 August 2018 at 03:50:44 UTC, Shachar Shemesh
wrote:
[...]
Can you list what you or other Weka
On Friday, 24 August 2018 at 11:55:47 UTC, Petar Kirov
[ZombineDev] wrote:
One of the things that makes Go successful is the quality/ease
of use of its toolchain. They have full cross-compilation
support out of the box because they don't rely on anything from
the C toolchain (libc, linker,
On Friday, August 24, 2018 4:44:31 PM MDT Dominikus Dittes Scherkl via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
> You're underestimating the benefits. It's not just to be
> eventually slightly faster. It makes @safe versions possible,
> this in turn avoids a lot of @trusted calls, so reduces review
> effort. It
On Friday, 24 August 2018 at 22:16:25 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Friday, August 24, 2018 7:46:57 AM MDT Mike Franklin via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Friday, 24 August 2018 at 13:21:25 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
> I think that you're crazy.
No, I just see more potential in D than you do.
On Friday, August 24, 2018 7:46:57 AM MDT Mike Franklin via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
> On Friday, 24 August 2018 at 13:21:25 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> > I think that you're crazy.
>
> No, I just see more potential in D than you do.
To be clear, I'm not calling you crazy in general. I'm calling
On Friday, 24 August 2018 at 13:21:25 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
I honestly don't see how attempting to divorce druntime from
libc does anything but increase the amount of work that we have
to do and increase the likelihood that basic OS functionality
is going to be buggy, since we will
On Friday, 24 August 2018 at 13:21:25 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
I think that you're crazy.
No, I just see more potential in D than you do.
Mike
On Friday, August 24, 2018 6:05:40 AM MDT Mike Franklin via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
> > You're basically trying to bypass the OS' public API if you're
> > trying to bypass libc.
>
> No I'm trying to bypass libc and use the OS API directly.
And my point is that most OSes consider libc to be their OS
On Friday, 24 August 2018 at 11:15:21 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
Linux is the only OS I'm aware of that considers the syscall
layer to be something that anything outside the OS would
normally call.
I think Linux considers system calls the OS API.
Other OSes consider libc to be part of
On Friday, 24 August 2018 at 09:46:08 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Friday, August 24, 2018 2:46:06 AM MDT Dave Jones via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Friday, 24 August 2018 at 04:50:34 UTC, Mike Franklin wrote:
> On Friday, 24 August 2018 at 04:12:42 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
> wrote:
>
>
> It's
On Friday, August 24, 2018 4:18:31 AM MDT Mike Franklin via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
> On Friday, 24 August 2018 at 09:46:08 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> > For any kind of normal operating system, you _have_ to use
> > libc. It's part of the OS. Some pieces could be done without
> > it, but on the
On Friday, 24 August 2018 at 09:46:08 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
For any kind of normal operating system, you _have_ to use
libc. It's part of the OS. Some pieces could be done without
it, but on the whole, you use libc if you want to talk to the
OS. That's just life. The only exceptions
On Friday, 24 August 2018 at 01:50:53 UTC, Jon Degenhardt wrote:
quality, consistency, completeness
My point is that it's more important to have useful, easy to
change, messy libraries.
If you restrict yourself to whatever is in Phobos then the burden
on core developers is only ever
On Friday, August 24, 2018 2:46:06 AM MDT Dave Jones via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
> On Friday, 24 August 2018 at 04:50:34 UTC, Mike Franklin wrote:
> > On Friday, 24 August 2018 at 04:12:42 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
> > wrote:
> >
> >
> > It's not a problem for Phobos to depend on the C standard
> >
On Friday, 24 August 2018 at 04:50:34 UTC, Mike Franklin wrote:
On Friday, 24 August 2018 at 04:12:42 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
It's not a problem for Phobos to depend on the C standard
library. My goals have to do with making D, the language,
freestanding (a.k.a nimble-D).
If the
On Friday, 24 August 2018 at 04:12:42 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
Unless you're trying to argue for folks dropping Phobos, that's
just not going to fly. Phobos uses libc heavily, and it really
can't do what it needs to do without it (e.g. file operations).
Divorcing druntime from libc may
On Thursday, August 23, 2018 7:01:41 PM MDT Mike Franklin via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
> On Friday, 24 August 2018 at 00:58:35 UTC, Guillaume Piolat wrote:
> > D programs tend to use the C runtime directly, and quite a lot
> > of it:
> > https://github.com/search?l=D=%22import+core.stdc%22=Code
>
> I
On Friday, 24 August 2018 at 00:46:14 UTC, Mike Franklin wrote:
It seems, from someone without much historical perspective,
that Phobos was intended to be something like the .Net
Framework for D. Perhaps there are a few fundamentals
(std.algorithm, std.allocator, etc.) to keep, but for the
On Friday, 24 August 2018 at 00:58:35 UTC, Guillaume Piolat wrote:
D programs tend to use the C runtime directly, and quite a lot
of it:
https://github.com/search?l=D=%22import+core.stdc%22=Code
I know. They should get that from
https://github.com/D-Programming-Deimos/libc or perhaps even
On Friday, 24 August 2018 at 00:56:10 UTC, Mike Franklin wrote:
On Friday, 24 August 2018 at 00:53:20 UTC, Guillaume Piolat
wrote:
Do you also mean to reimplement everything related to FILE*?
floating-point parsing and conversion to string?
multithreaded malloc?
Only what's need for
On Friday, 24 August 2018 at 00:53:20 UTC, Guillaume Piolat wrote:
Do you also mean to reimplement everything related to FILE*?
floating-point parsing and conversion to string?
multithreaded malloc?
Only what's need for druntime. That would include multi-threaded
malloc, but not the FILE*
On Friday, 24 August 2018 at 00:47:18 UTC, Mike Franklin wrote:
On Friday, 24 August 2018 at 00:46:14 UTC, Mike Franklin wrote:
But I need it to implement `memcpy` and `memcmp` in D, so we
can remove the dependency on the D standard library :-)
Gah! What a typo. I mean the C standard
On Friday, 24 August 2018 at 00:32:59 UTC, Guillaume Piolat wrote:
For example: why implement AVX in DMD backend? Who are the
users that will be delighted by that? Those interested in
performance already use some other back-end, it's imo a
completely useless development since _no one_ use
On Friday, 24 August 2018 at 00:46:14 UTC, Mike Franklin wrote:
But I need it to implement `memcpy` and `memcmp` in D, so we
can remove the dependency on the D standard library :-)
Gah! What a typo. I mean the C standard library.
On Thursday, 23 August 2018 at 04:46:25 UTC, Eugene Wissner wrote:
But this kind of development doesn't work anymore that well for
commercial customers that aren't (only) interested in research.
From this perspective D becomes over-complicated, half-finished
language. And nobody can tell what
On Thursday, 23 August 2018 at 03:50:44 UTC, Shachar Shemesh
wrote:
On 22/08/18 21:34, Ali wrote:
On Wednesday, 22 August 2018 at 17:42:56 UTC, Joakim wrote:
Pretty positive overall, and the negatives he mentions are
fairly obvious to anyone paying attention.
Yea, I agree, the negatives are
On Thursday, 23 August 2018 at 07:37:07 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
On Thursday, 23 August 2018 at 06:58:13 UTC, Joakim wrote:
On Thursday, 23 August 2018 at 03:50:44 UTC, Shachar Shemesh
wrote:
On 22/08/18 21:34, Ali wrote:
On Wednesday, 22 August 2018 at 17:42:56 UTC, Joakim wrote:
Pretty
On Thursday, 23 August 2018 at 03:50:44 UTC, Shachar Shemesh
wrote:
To sum it up: fatal flaws + no path to fixing + no push from
the community = inevitable eventual death.
With great regrets,
Shachar
I want to jump in for the sake of someone from the outside coming
in and reading this to
On Thursday, 23 August 2018 at 07:37:07 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
Possible Solution: Make all globals hidden by default unless
'export'.
Same mess as in C++. But there you have -fvisibility=hidden at
least to fix it.
Side effects: Everyone will be spending weeks to months fixing
their
On Thursday, 23 August 2018 at 07:37:07 UTC, Iain Buclaw wrote:
Symptom: The compiler can't discard unused symbols at compile
time, and so it will spend a lot of time pointlessly optimising
code.
Problem: D has no notion of symbol visibility.
Possible Solution: Make all globals hidden by
On Thursday, 23 August 2018 at 06:58:13 UTC, Joakim wrote:
On Thursday, 23 August 2018 at 03:50:44 UTC, Shachar Shemesh
wrote:
On 22/08/18 21:34, Ali wrote:
On Wednesday, 22 August 2018 at 17:42:56 UTC, Joakim wrote:
Pretty positive overall, and the negatives he mentions are
fairly obvious to
On Thursday, 23 August 2018 at 03:50:44 UTC, Shachar Shemesh
wrote:
On 22/08/18 21:34, Ali wrote:
On Wednesday, 22 August 2018 at 17:42:56 UTC, Joakim wrote:
Pretty positive overall, and the negatives he mentions are
fairly obvious to anyone paying attention.
Yea, I agree, the negatives are
On Thursday, 23 August 2018 at 03:50:44 UTC, Shachar Shemesh
wrote:
And it's not just Weka. I've had a chance to talk in private to
some other developers. Quite a lot have serious, fundamental
issues with the language. You will notice none of them speaks
up on this thread.
They don't see
On Thursday, 23 August 2018 at 03:50:44 UTC, Shachar Shemesh
wrote:
No, no and no.
I was holding out on replying to this thread to see how the
community would react. The vibe I'm getting, however, is that
the people who are seeing D's problems have given up on
affecting change.
It is no
On Thursday, 23 August 2018 at 03:50:44 UTC, Shachar Shemesh
wrote:
No, no and no.
I was holding out on replying to this thread to see how the
community would react. The vibe I'm getting, however, is that
the people who are seeing D's problems have given up on
affecting change.
It is no
On Thursday, 23 August 2018 at 03:50:44 UTC, Shachar Shemesh
wrote:
Every single one of the people rushing to defend D at the time
has since come around. There is still some debate on whether,
points vs. counter points, choosing D was a good idea, but the
overwhelming consensus inside Weka
On 22/08/18 21:34, Ali wrote:
On Wednesday, 22 August 2018 at 17:42:56 UTC, Joakim wrote:
Pretty positive overall, and the negatives he mentions are fairly
obvious to anyone paying attention.
Yea, I agree, the negatives are not really negative
Walter not matter how smart he is, he is one man
89 matches
Mail list logo
