Asynchronous loading was implemented in vs2013 (or 2012). vs2010
loads projects synchronously and freezes until it's all done.
On Wednesday, 14 October 2015 at 09:16:14 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
Asynchronous loading was implemented in vs2013 (or 2012).
vs2010 loads projects synchronously and freezes until it's all
done.
That's curious. I'm using VS 2013, but the solution and most of
the projects are 2010. Maybe it retains
On Friday, 9 October 2015 at 21:24:52 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
vs starts is usable in about 2 second for me also. Try using
a computer from the modern era with an SSD.
LOL. I _do_ use a computer with an SSD.
On my machine vs2013 starts in 3 seconds: core i5 3470, 8gb RAM
(3gb in use,
Also antivirus scans all processes on start or so my colleague
reports, I didn't confirm it myself.
On Monday, 12 October 2015 at 12:41:53 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
On Monday, 12 October 2015 at 12:10:15 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
It may have something to do with the projects that we have,
but regardless of the reason, VS is incredibly slow to start
and has been on every machine that I've used
On Monday, 12 October 2015 at 10:25:49 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
On Friday, 9 October 2015 at 21:24:52 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
vs starts is usable in about 2 second for me also. Try using
a computer from the modern era with an SSD.
LOL. I _do_ use a computer with an SSD.
On my machine
On Monday, 12 October 2015 at 12:10:15 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
It may have something to do with the projects that we have, but
regardless of the reason, VS is incredibly slow to start and
has been on every machine that I've used at my current job.
Obviously, YMMV given that some of the
On Thursday, 8 October 2015 at 18:29:00 UTC, Laeeth Isharc wrote:
It'd be nice to have asm.js or even JS.
Look at Adam Ruppe's D to JavaScript compiler. It hasn't been
maintained, but it was a very interesting experiment.
I wish there were more interest in having LDC generate JS via
On Friday, 25 September 2015 at 08:59:17 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
On Friday, 25 September 2015 at 08:53:41 UTC, John Colvin wrote:
On Friday, 25 September 2015 at 07:26:13 UTC, rumbu wrote:
Starting Visual Studio on my machine takes 2 seconds,
What magic are you doing to achieve this? It
On Friday, 9 October 2015 at 21:17:16 UTC, Dogbreath wrote:
On Friday, 25 September 2015 at 08:59:17 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
On Friday, 25 September 2015 at 08:53:41 UTC, John Colvin
wrote:
On Friday, 25 September 2015 at 07:26:13 UTC, rumbu wrote:
Starting Visual Studio on my machine
On Thursday, 8 October 2015 at 16:47:44 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad
wrote:
On Thursday, 8 October 2015 at 16:28:45 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
What D lacks in comparison to C w.r.t. to writing an engine?
C is not really a comparable option language wise, C has not
changed a lot since the 70s. But if
On Friday, 9 October 2015 at 12:05:13 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad
wrote:
C++ is under pressure from Rust, Go and perhaps also D. Mostly
because it takes years (or decades) to get new features into
C++, so they have to start working on new features early. I am
not even sure we would have seen the
On Friday, 9 October 2015 at 10:13:07 UTC, Chris wrote:
such as Go and Rust. I remember the VM fashion a couple of
years back (mainly Java and C#), but still languages that
compile to native code kept coming up and now everyone goes
native, including the VM supporters. Why? Cos it didn't work
On Thursday, 8 October 2015 at 16:43:12 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad
wrote:
Pointers are of little use for a type that is always reference
type.
You can have many different types of references.
You can have class references in D.
Make them not compile? @nogc does exactly that.
No, make the
On Friday, 9 October 2015 at 12:06:40 UTC, rsw0x wrote:
On Friday, 9 October 2015 at 12:05:13 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad
wrote:
C++ is under pressure from Rust, Go and perhaps also D. Mostly
because it takes years (or decades) to get new features into
C++, so they have to start working on new
On Wednesday, 7 October 2015 at 05:36:15 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad
wrote:
1. Define the target, then you can figure out the features.
2. Solid non-gc memory management and ownership.
3. Clean up the type system.
4. Complete the language spec.
5. Clean up the syntax.
That's very vague. Unless
On Thursday, 8 October 2015 at 09:45:53 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad
wrote:
On Thursday, 8 October 2015 at 09:24:50 UTC, Chris wrote:
On Wednesday, 7 October 2015 at 05:36:15 UTC, Ola Fosheim
Grøstad wrote:
That's not vague at all.
1. Define the target, then you can figure out the features.
On Thursday, 8 October 2015 at 11:34:51 UTC, Chris wrote:
in D. Then again, I don't know how Go and Rust will fare in a
couple of years' time.
I think the C++ people are desperately trying to recapture the
application market with some of the things that they propose for
C++17/20. I think
On Thursday, 8 October 2015 at 09:24:50 UTC, Chris wrote:
On Wednesday, 7 October 2015 at 05:36:15 UTC, Ola Fosheim
Grøstad wrote:
1. Define the target, then you can figure out the features.
2. Solid non-gc memory management and ownership.
3. Clean up the type system.
4. Complete the
On Thursday, 8 October 2015 at 10:31:57 UTC, Chris wrote:
On Thursday, 8 October 2015 at 09:45:53 UTC, Ola Fosheim
Grøstad wrote:
That's not vague at all.
1. Define the target, then you can figure out the features.
Then define the target. Make some suggestions.
I've already raised this
On Thursday, 8 October 2015 at 10:59:04 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad
wrote:
On Thursday, 8 October 2015 at 10:31:57 UTC, Chris wrote:
On Thursday, 8 October 2015 at 09:45:53 UTC, Ola Fosheim
Grøstad wrote:
That's not vague at all.
1. Define the target, then you can figure out the features.
On Thursday, 8 October 2015 at 11:56:58 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad
wrote:
On Thursday, 8 October 2015 at 11:34:51 UTC, Chris wrote:
in D. Then again, I don't know how Go and Rust will fare in a
couple of years' time.
I think the C++ people are desperately trying to recapture the
application
On Thursday, 8 October 2015 at 13:15:18 UTC, Chris wrote:
That's what I've been doing for 2-3 years now thanks to D. I
use D as the core and everything else is glued onto the D core.
D is actually pretty good at this. Since it's cross-platform, I
can use the same code base everywhere. I don't
On Thursday, 8 October 2015 at 13:45:43 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad
wrote:
On Thursday, 8 October 2015 at 13:15:18 UTC, Chris wrote:
That's what I've been doing for 2-3 years now thanks to D. I
use D as the core and everything else is glued onto the D
core. D is actually pretty good at this.
On Thursday, 8 October 2015 at 10:59:04 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad
wrote:
I think D could do well if it focused on engine-level system
programming and made sure it was absolutely top notch for that
purpose. (Game engines, search engines, ray tracing engines, in
memory database engines, business
On Thursday, 8 October 2015 at 16:25:09 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
Where do you think is a limit to applicability of a
turing-complete language?
?
Pointers are of little use for a type that is always reference
type.
You can have many different types of references.
Make them not compile? @nogc
On Wednesday, 7 October 2015 at 13:15:38 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad
wrote:
On Wednesday, 7 October 2015 at 10:18:16 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
If you want to know what D is in details, see dlang.org for
language spec.
No, that is backwards. :-) The language spec is the product.
What is needed is a
On Thursday, 8 October 2015 at 16:28:45 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
What D lacks in comparison to C w.r.t. to writing an engine?
C is not really a comparable option language wise, C has not
changed a lot since the 70s. But if you started to make a list of
what the C eco system offers then you get a
On Thursday, 8 October 2015 at 17:56:57 UTC, Freddy wrote:
On Thursday, 8 October 2015 at 14:02:58 UTC, Chris wrote:
It'd be nice to have asm.js or even JS.
The major ploblem I see right now with targeting asm.js is
garbage collection. This can be worked around (I think) by
having all
On Thursday, 8 October 2015 at 14:02:58 UTC, Chris wrote:
It'd be nice to have asm.js or even JS.
The major ploblem I see right now with targeting asm.js is
garbage collection. This can be worked around (I think) by having
all pointers be fat pointers (size_t* stack_ref_count,T* data)
and
On Thursday, 8 October 2015 at 10:31:57 UTC, Chris wrote:
2. Solid non-gc memory management and ownership.
Any specific implementation in mind?
Well the first step to that should be implement a way to make
sure pointers don't escape their scope.
On Thursday, 8 October 2015 at 14:02:58 UTC, Chris wrote:
On Thursday, 8 October 2015 at 13:45:43 UTC, Ola Fosheim
Grøstad wrote:
On Thursday, 8 October 2015 at 13:15:18 UTC, Chris wrote:
That's what I've been doing for 2-3 years now thanks to D. I
use D as the core and everything else is
On Wednesday, 7 October 2015 at 05:36:15 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad
wrote:
On Tuesday, 6 October 2015 at 17:07:27 UTC, Chris wrote:
Ok, and do you have a plan or a concrete wish list that you
could hand over to the core developers? What features would be
indispensable or are of utmost
Who cares? - Good luck in the .NET world.
On Wednesday, 7 October 2015 at 09:25:10 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad
wrote:
That's wonderfully undefined. A pragmatic compiled language can
be anything from ATS to compiled Python.
If you want to know what D is in details, see dlang.org for
language spec.
Static analysis is a focus and
On Wednesday, 7 October 2015 at 08:17:32 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
The target is a pragmatic compiled language.
That's wonderfully undefined. A pragmatic compiled language can
be anything from ATS to compiled Python.
Static analysis is a focus and believed to be done with
relatively simple and
On Wednesday, 7 October 2015 at 10:18:16 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
If you want to know what D is in details, see dlang.org for
language spec.
No, that is backwards. :-) The language spec is the product. What
is needed is a definition of what the problem area is (e.g. use
cases).
problem area ->
On Tuesday, 6 October 2015 at 17:07:27 UTC, Chris wrote:
Ok, and do you have a plan or a concrete wish list that you
could hand over to the core developers? What features would be
indispensable or are of utmost importance, in your opinion?
1. Define the target, then you can figure out the
On Monday, 5 October 2015 at 15:01:14 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad
wrote:
Could you line out how you would like a language to be so it
doesn't bore you stiff?
Consistency in philosophy is important. If D is a compile time
oriented library authors language (and I think it is) then that
needs to
On Monday, 5 October 2015 at 15:46:35 UTC, Jeremy wrote:
Respectfully, I think helping new users get a jump start on
their application produces an initial jolt of productivity
which in turn helps keep someone motivated.
Jump-starting does not keep them motivated. It makes them invest
On Thursday, 1 October 2015 at 16:00:29 UTC, Chris wrote:
I agree that the D community raises the bar quite high for
itself and other people might get the impression that
everything is perfect, while it isn't. However, a lot of
complaints are about IDEs, one click installers (i.e. the
tools)
On Monday, 5 October 2015 at 15:01:14 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad
wrote:
Well, I am less concerned about those that stumble on the
doorstep.
If that is enough to not carry on then they are most likely not
motivated and can probably get their needs covered elsewhere.
Respectfully, I think
On Wednesday, 30 September 2015 at 17:32:27 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe
wrote:
On Wednesday, 30 September 2015 at 17:12:37 UTC, Mengu wrote:
what is libucrtd.lib
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/vcblog/archive/2015/03/03/introducing-the-universal-crt.aspx
"The Universal CRT is a Windows operating system
On Wednesday, 30 September 2015 at 12:21:10 UTC, Ola Fosheim
Grøstad wrote:
The reason is much more likely that the expectations are set at
a level where D does not deliver. If you want a production
environment to be judged favourably it is a good idea to set
the expectations one notch below
On Wednesday, 30 September 2015 at 17:12:37 UTC, Mengu wrote:
what is libucrtd.lib
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/vcblog/archive/2015/03/03/introducing-the-universal-crt.aspx
"The Universal CRT is a Windows operating system component. It is
a part of Windows 10. For Windows versions prior to
On Wednesday, 30 September 2015 at 15:45:02 UTC, learn wrote:
working as advertised
libucrtd.lib is still sought and not found after another new
release.
you guys should get your shit together, otherwise more people
that try D will "Moving back to .NET" and not tell you about it
will "Moving back to .NET" and not tell you about
it.
well i guess i leave now too, since i don't have the time and
patience to wait any longer for the compiler to work.
sincerely yours
what is libucrtd.lib? what kind of application/library were you
trying to build?
i just wan
On Sunday, 20 September 2015 at 17:32:53 UTC, Adam wrote:
My experiences with D recently have not been fun.
The language itself has a top notch feature rich set. The
implementation, excluding bugs, feels a bit boxy and old
school. .NET has a unified approach and everything seems to fit
On Tuesday, 29 September 2015 at 17:22:30 UTC, jmh530 wrote:
On Tuesday, 29 September 2015 at 15:31:30 UTC, Laeeth Isharc
wrote:
In my experience, risk is the excuse, and habit and human
dislike of change is a much more powerful reason.
I love this line.
Thank you. The sentiment I am
On Wednesday, 30 September 2015 at 05:17:59 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
On Wednesday, 30 September 2015 at 05:00:11 UTC, H. S. Teoh
wrote:
Are we accepting PRs to convert ddmd to be more D-like?
T
Sure, you can submit PR here :
https://github.com/SDC-Developers/SDC
;)
LOL.
- Jonathan M
On Tuesday, 29 September 2015 at 16:19:19 UTC, Ola Fosheim
Grøstad wrote:
On Tuesday, 29 September 2015 at 15:31:30 UTC, Laeeth Isharc
wrote:
On Sunday, 27 September 2015 at 09:51:42 UTC, Ola Fosheim
Grøstad wrote:
But even after years of polish Go is still perceived as risky:
Of course it's
On Tuesday, 29 September 2015 at 17:52:54 UTC, Chris wrote:
And don't forget a*se covering, risk aversion is often not much
more than that. It's one of the most common things in
organizations. If things go wrong, at least you stuck to the
protocol, the the well-established, widely used
On Tuesday, 29 September 2015 at 17:33:04 UTC, Chris wrote:
On Tuesday, 29 September 2015 at 05:52:13 UTC, Ola Fosheim
Grøstad wrote:
This logic is very difficult to follow. Software project
management is often done by people who are programmers. From a
project health point of view D2
On Wednesday, 30 September 2015 at 04:59:22 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
I find these kinds of comments rather humorous, actually. Every
once in a while, somebody would barge into the forum and decry
the current state of things, bemoaning that D is too
Linux-centric and that Windows gets no love.
On Wednesday, 30 September 2015 at 16:52:21 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe
wrote:
On Wednesday, 30 September 2015 at 09:49:34 UTC, rumbu wrote:
I would believe that when core.sys.windows will have the same
amount of code like core.sys.posix after the default
installation.
I'm unbelievably close to that
On Wednesday, 30 September 2015 at 04:59:22 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 04:32:52AM +, Mike Parker via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Tuesday, 29 September 2015 at 22:05:48 UTC, rumbu wrote:
>My main complaints are also the compiler error messages ("Out
>of memory" is the most
On Wednesday, 30 September 2015 at 09:49:34 UTC, rumbu wrote:
Or when mscoff32 libs will be included in setup.
Said to be in 2.068.1:
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=13889
On Tuesday, 29 September 2015 at 05:52:13 UTC, Ola Fosheim
Grøstad wrote:
D2 does not solve C++'s issues
Heartbleed?
On Tuesday, 29 September 2015 at 22:05:48 UTC, rumbu wrote:
The original OP complained about compiler error messages and
the lack of a true IDE, these are not "qualities" of a system
level programming language, I see them as basic failures.
Yes, sure, but people looking for a system level
On Wednesday, 30 September 2015 at 07:44:09 UTC, Laeeth Isharc
wrote:
On Tuesday, 29 September 2015 at 16:19:19 UTC, Ola Fosheim
Grøstad wrote:
On Tuesday, 29 September 2015 at 15:31:30 UTC, Laeeth Isharc
wrote:
We know that you think D is a toy language, although you also
say that you aren't
On Tuesday, 29 September 2015 at 17:33:04 UTC, Chris wrote:
This is not my impression. Even "geeks" don't touch D (I know
this from personal experience), even when there's no risk
involved, e.g. when writing a small internal tool. As soon as
they hear they have to learn about ranges and map!(a
On Wednesday, 30 September 2015 at 09:16:44 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
On Tuesday, 29 September 2015 at 05:52:13 UTC, Ola Fosheim
Grøstad wrote:
D2 does not solve C++'s issues
Heartbleed?
C++ offers optional bounds checks + static analysis tools.
On Wednesday, 30 September 2015 at 12:43:10 UTC, Ola Fosheim
Grøstad wrote:
On Wednesday, 30 September 2015 at 09:16:44 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
On Tuesday, 29 September 2015 at 05:52:13 UTC, Ola Fosheim
Grøstad wrote:
D2 does not solve C++'s issues
Heartbleed?
C++ offers optional bounds checks
working as advertised
libucrtd.lib is still sought and not found after another new
release.
you guys should get your shit together, otherwise more people
that try D will "Moving back to .NET" and not tell you about it.
well i guess i leave now too, since i don't hav
On Wednesday, 30 September 2015 at 09:49:34 UTC, rumbu wrote:
I would believe that when core.sys.windows will have the same
amount of code like core.sys.posix after the default
installation.
I'm unbelievably close to that now, I just have a million other
things to do (...including adding
On Tuesday, 29 September 2015 at 05:52:13 UTC, Ola Fosheim
Grøstad wrote:
What tools can D successfully replace? Give a focused answer to
that and you can improve on D to a level where it becomes
attractive.
But keep it real. Fear among programmers is not D's main issue.
That's just an
On Tuesday, 29 September 2015 at 11:40:20 UTC, Ola Fosheim
Grøstad wrote:
On Tuesday, 29 September 2015 at 09:02:13 UTC, John Colvin
wrote:
actually use the product. If you can put your theoretical mind
on hold for a few days and actually immerse yourself in the
language and its idioms for
On Tuesday, 29 September 2015 at 06:16:18 UTC, Ola Fosheim
Grøstad wrote:
D2 is pretty much C++ with a Boehm collector attached to it. So
to get traction D has to improve on that model significantly OR
change direction completely.
You speak like someone who's read the spec, but doesn't
On Tuesday, 29 September 2015 at 09:02:13 UTC, John Colvin wrote:
actually use the product. If you can put your theoretical mind
on hold for a few days and actually immerse yourself in the
language and its idioms for practical use*, you'd see that D
has a large feature-overlap with to
On Tuesday, 29 September 2015 at 09:02:13 UTC, John Colvin wrote:
On Tuesday, 29 September 2015 at 06:16:18 UTC, Ola Fosheim
Grøstad wrote:
D2 is pretty much C++ with a Boehm collector attached to it.
So to get traction D has to improve on that model
significantly OR change direction
On Tuesday, 29 September 2015 at 09:12:11 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
C++11 and 14 have closed the gap, but the two are still quite
distinct. That doesn't necessarily mean that D is better in all
cases, but D is definitely not just C++ with a GC.
It isn't "just C++", but D as a language is
On Tuesday, 29 September 2015 at 11:53:45 UTC, Ola Fosheim
Grøstad wrote:
It isn't "just C++", but D as a language is close enough to be
considered a close relative. So if you are used to implementing
libraries in C++, the jump to D is not a big jump.
That's as true as saying that D is
On Sunday, 27 September 2015 at 09:51:42 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad
wrote:
On Monday, 28 September 2015 at 09:35:53 UTC, Chris wrote:
In response to Ola:
On Monday, 28 September 2015 at 09:35:53 UTC, Chris wrote:
Yep. What I was talking about was not the fear of a commercial
failure because of
On Tuesday, 29 September 2015 at 14:24:45 UTC, Atila Neves wrote:
wouldn't be a big jump. You'd end up with code that looks like
C++ or Java that no seasoned D developer would write.
I don't really see your point. "idiomatic" is a cultural regime,
not a language and not necessarily an
On Friday, 25 September 2015 at 21:46:35 UTC, Laeeth Isharc wrote:
I was speaking about the general case, but since you made it a
personal reference - if I spent time to step back and admire my
handiwork, I wouldn't at this point have time to finish the
broader project as its at the limit of
On Tuesday, 29 September 2015 at 15:31:30 UTC, Laeeth Isharc
wrote:
On Sunday, 27 September 2015 at 09:51:42 UTC, Ola Fosheim
Grøstad wrote:
But even after years of polish Go is still perceived as risky:
Of course it's risky. Yet why do people who are sensible
commercial people who aren't
On Tuesday, 29 September 2015 at 06:16:18 UTC, Ola Fosheim
Grøstad wrote:
On Tuesday, 29 September 2015 at 05:52:13 UTC, Ola Fosheim
Grøstad wrote:
1. That C# and Java programmers end up being disgruntled is not
a failure of the language, that is a failure of communicating
that D is a system
On Tuesday, 29 September 2015 at 22:05:48 UTC, rumbu wrote:
My main complaints are also the compiler error messages ("Out
of memory" is the most annoying one) and the Linux-centric
approach of the development, but I'm far from being disgruntled.
I've never understood the "Linux-centric"
On Wednesday, 30 September 2015 at 05:00:11 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 09:54:34PM -0700, Walter Bright via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
On 9/29/2015 7:24 AM, Atila Neves wrote:
>That's as true as saying that D is similar enough to Java
>that it wouldn't be a big jump. You'd end up
On Tue, Sep 29, 2015 at 09:54:34PM -0700, Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On 9/29/2015 7:24 AM, Atila Neves wrote:
> >That's as true as saying that D is similar enough to Java that it
> >wouldn't be a big jump. You'd end up with code that looks like C++ or
> >Java that no seasoned D
On Wed, Sep 30, 2015 at 04:32:52AM +, Mike Parker via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On Tuesday, 29 September 2015 at 22:05:48 UTC, rumbu wrote:
> >My main complaints are also the compiler error messages ("Out of
> >memory" is the most annoying one) and the Linux-centric approach of
> >the
On 9/29/2015 7:24 AM, Atila Neves wrote:
That's as true as saying that D is similar enough to Java that it
wouldn't be a big jump. You'd end up with code that looks like C++ or
Java that no seasoned D developer would write.
The difference is actually quite big. If it weren't, why would
any of
On Tuesday, 29 September 2015 at 05:52:13 UTC, Ola Fosheim
Grøstad wrote:
And don't forget a*se covering, risk aversion is often not much
more than that. It's one of the most common things in
organizations. If things go wrong, at least you stuck to the
protocol, the the well-established,
On Tuesday, 29 September 2015 at 11:40:20 UTC, Ola Fosheim
Grøstad wrote:
There is nothing theoretical about this, I am only concerned
about the language, not the standard library. The same with C++.
One usually don't judge a system level language based on its
libraries. System level
On Tuesday, 29 September 2015 at 15:31:30 UTC, Laeeth Isharc
wrote:
In my experience, risk is the excuse, and habit and human
dislike of change is a much more powerful reason.
I love this line.
On Tuesday, 29 September 2015 at 05:52:13 UTC, Ola Fosheim
Grøstad wrote:
This logic is very difficult to follow. Software project
management is often done by people who are programmers. From a
project health point of view D2 suffers from the same issues as
C++, the language feature set
On Monday, 28 September 2015 at 09:35:53 UTC, Chris wrote:
Yep. What I was talking about was not the fear of a commercial
failure because of having picked the wrong tool (management). I
was talking about my impression that D might intimidate
programmers/coders.
This logic is very difficult
On Saturday, 26 September 2015 at 00:28:19 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
A lot of folks write code because they want to get something
done and simply because they like coding. Publicizing it isn't
necessarily particularly important to them. They may want to
make it open source so that others
On 25/09/2015 14:43, Laeeth Isharc wrote:
On Friday, 25 September 2015 at 11:24:04 UTC, Bruno Medeiros wrote:
On 23/09/2015 22:02, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote:
IDE is not just a nice interface to write code. It's a way to organize
files, AST based file browsing, github integration, and - the
On Friday, 25 September 2015 at 21:03:12 UTC, Laeeth Isharc wrote:
And sensible mercantile consideration of what might go wrong
and what you are going to do if that happens - that's a very
different thing from what Chris was speaking about. Because in
enterprises it's often the case that
On Sunday, 27 September 2015 at 10:38:39 UTC, cym13 wrote:
You might like to read http://www.paulgraham.com/avg.html if
that's not already done.
Startups have a different logic to them, they might try to
attract developers to build a small tight team, for less pay, by
providing a more
On Saturday, 26 September 2015 at 22:19:41 UTC, Laeeth Isharc
wrote:
In practice, life is risk, and sometimes you have to take
calculated risks to advance - this is true whether or not we
acknowledge it to ourselves. Some people shouldn't even think
about using D at work, but that tradeoff
On Sunday, 27 September 2015 at 09:51:42 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad
wrote:
On Saturday, 26 September 2015 at 22:19:41 UTC, Laeeth Isharc
wrote:
[...]
I am not doing consulting on a forum, I am arguing against the
viewpoint that the lack of adoption of fringe tools is a result
of unjustified
On Friday, 25 September 2015 at 21:03:12 UTC, Laeeth Isharc wrote:
So, no, one can't say that in a blanket way risk aversion is
good project management if what you care about is enterprise
value rather than what people think of you.
Risk aversion is good software project management. Period.
On Saturday, 26 September 2015 at 11:00:39 UTC, Ola Fosheim
Grøstad wrote:
On Friday, 25 September 2015 at 21:03:12 UTC, Laeeth Isharc
wrote:
So, no, one can't say that in a blanket way risk aversion is
good project management if what you care about is enterprise
value rather than what people
On Friday, 25 September 2015 at 10:42:26 UTC, Bruno Medeiros
wrote:
On 23/09/2015 22:33, Paolo Invernizzi wrote:
For git and file organization, nope, I still prefer to use
them outside
the IDE...
Cheers!
---
Paolo
But are you using command-line git, or a git graphical frontend
like Git
On Saturday, 26 September 2015 at 19:28:55 UTC, Ola Fosheim
Grøstad wrote:
On Saturday, 26 September 2015 at 12:48:49 UTC, Laeeth Isharc
wrote:
What was it you were called by one compiler writer here ? The
king of shifting goal posts.
Which is a completely unreasonable claim. Argue your
On Saturday, 26 September 2015 at 12:48:49 UTC, Laeeth Isharc
wrote:
What was it you were called by one compiler writer here ? The
king of shifting goal posts.
Which is a completely unreasonable claim. Argue your point and
don't go ad hominem. Referencing Deadalnix's rhetorics when he
is
On Friday, 25 September 2015 at 14:50:13 UTC, jdeath wrote:
it is s shame that you people don't start thinking about what
you need to do so that developers can easily and quickly use D
on windows. what are the most common used libraries, interfaces
to other software ...
instead you incense
On Friday, 25 September 2015 at 14:27:25 UTC, David DeWitt wrote:
Look at Node thats stuff changes like every hour yet ppl still
use it.
I'll never understand why anyone would use node.js. The only
explanation is that they are hellbent on using javascript for
everything? But I guess it is no
1 - 100 of 217 matches
Mail list logo
