On Thursday, 17 January 2019 at 01:59:29 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: On 1/16/2019 4:19 PM, H. S. Teoh wrote: On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 11:43:19PM +, John Carter via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote: [...] Yes, that's one of the outstanding qualities of D, and one that I was immensely impressed with when I perused the Phobos source code for the first time. Bartosz Milewski is a C++ programmer and a Haskell fan. He once gave a presentation at NWCPP where he wrote a few lines of Haskell code. Then, he showed the same code written using C++ template metaprogramming. The Haskell bits in the C++ code were highlighted in red. It was like a sea of grass with a shrubbery here and there. Interestingly, by comparing the red dots in the C++ code with the Haskell code, you could understand what the C++ was doing. Without the red highlighting, it was a hopeless wall of < > :-) Was that a pre C++11 version of C++, or a more modern one? It would be instructive to see that example with C++17 or even 20 and D next to each other.
On Tuesday, 5 December 2017 at 18:20:40 UTC, Seb wrote: I am looking forward to hearing (1) what you think can be done in three months by a student and (2) will have a huge impact on the D ecosystem. Of the projects in , I like the general purpose betterC libraries most, and I think it's something where students could make a real impact in that time period.  https://developers.google.com/open-source/gsoc/timeline  https://wiki.dlang.org/GSOC_2018_Ideas
On Thursday, 7 September 2017 at 20:55:22 UTC, Nordlöw wrote: Are there any new code-generation features in LLVM 5.0 that LDC will make use of? Given that LLVM has direct support for coroutines since 4.0 (https://llvm.org/docs/Coroutines.html) I've wondered if D (even just LDC D for starters) could use that to implement async/await or a similar feature.
On Monday, 22 May 2017 at 15:05:24 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote: http://dlang.org/blog/2017/05/22/introspection-introspection-everywhere/ -- Andrei That was a great read, thanks! At the end, you mention a successful serial entrepreneur who counsels pursuing the great rather than the good ideas being advanced in the D community. Did he happen to mention which ideas were great, and which just good?
On Monday, 6 March 2017 at 02:25:41 UTC, Jeremy DeHaan wrote: Me working on it has effectively stalled because school takes up much of my time and I'm still pretty lacking in experience with garbage collection. That's pretty much why I'm doing the study. Best of luck to you with the study then! You've chosen an interesting and difficult topic.
On Friday, 3 March 2017 at 19:00:00 UTC, Jeremy DeHaan wrote: This is exciting for me because I really enjoyed the work I did during the last GSoC, so I'm hoping to learn more about garbage collection and contribute to D's garbage collector more in the future. What's the status of that work with respect to the D main line? Last I checked there's this https://github.com/dlang/druntime/pull/1603 which is just hanging. It would be great if D finally had a precise GC, though from https://wiki.dlang.org/Vision/2017H1 it would seem that @nogc has higher priority.
On Wednesday, 22 February 2017 at 18:12:50 UTC, Jon Degenhardt wrote: ...snip... Repository: https://github.com/eBay/tsv-utils-dlang Performance benchmarks: https://github.com/eBay/tsv-utils-dlang/blob/master/docs/Performance.md --Jon This is very nice code, and a good result for D. I'll study this carefully. So much of data analysis is reading/transforming files... I wish you didn't anonymize the specialty toolkits. I think I understand why you chose to do so, but it makes the comparison less valuable. Still, great work! Looking forward to a blogpost.
On Wednesday, 8 February 2017 at 21:41:24 UTC, Mike wrote: Suggesting D would be an exercise in futility, unless I can create a notable project in D in my spare time that demonstrates its advantages and appeal to the masses. I tried to do this 2 years ago, but D failed me, primarily due to https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=14758 I read this comment from you on another thread too, and (caveat: I'm not working in such resource constrained domains as you are) it seems sensible. It seems like it may be a good GSOC project to modify dmd as you suggest elsewhere. Have you considered trying to find someone to do that? I believe D has the potential to bury all other emerging languages out there, but only if it drops its historical baggage. At the moment, I'm of the opinion that D will remain an obscure language until someone forks D and takes it in a different direction (unlikely), or the D Foundation decides to "reboot" and start working on D3 with a new, updated perspective (more unlikely). I'd love to see a D3, but that seems unlikely, and more unlikely if D2 languishes. It seems though that your issues are with the implementation, not the language itself, so if you got your wishes below Instead I suggest following through on things like https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12270 and considering this proposal (http://forum.dlang.org/post/psssnzurlzeqeneag...@forum.dlang.org) instead. wouldn't you be mostly satisfied with D2?