"Walter" <newshound@digitalmars.com> wrote in message news:d2hbs5$1fb6$1@digitaldaemon.com...
>
> "Ben Hinkle" <bhinkle@mathworks.com> wrote in message news:d2h6a0$193m$1@digitaldaemon.com...
>> (**) the community stuff needs updating. A vesion 1.0 will get new people and the community links will be vital for these folks to get oriented.
> Also
>> a more complete spec would help. For example "final" is an attribute but
> the
>> only mention of what it does is in the functions.html for decorating a function member. No other use is mentioned (is it legal or undefined...?)
>
> It's a big help to me when people use the wiki links at the bottom of each
> page to provide specific feedback. When I update a page, it's easy to
> click
> on the wiki link and incorporate the suggestions.

I went to modify the Attributes page and I'm confused about what each section of the wiki page is for. There's "More Information","Examples","Message","Amendments" and "Links". Examples and Links I can understand (sortof) but the other three seem the same to me. I put my feedback under "Message" but that's because it says "Put your comments here". The others are blank and I have no idea who would fill those in.

Other questions come to mind:
Is there a summary page?
How often do these wiki's get looked at and what happens to the suggestions?
Does anyone go through the wiki and make sure it makes sense and move stuff
around if not?

-Ben

No.  Bug fixes, bug fixes, bug fixes.

-We need a feature and syntax free now.

-We need DMD's Linux support to not be sub-par compared to Windows
support.
	-Proper DWARF2 output
	-Shared Object support
	-Probably other stuff

-Phobos sucks... enough said.
	-A minimal DTL should be included with Phobos.  Despite D having cool
array stuff, some minimal wrapper classes  (or templates) would be nice.
	-Completely unorganized, an incohesive

I haven't run in to any show stopping bugs such that I can't get my code to work, but without _basic_ debugging support, some of my bugs are so hard to find, that I don't bother.  This is a *necessary* 1.0 feature.

John Demme


On Wed, 2005-03-30 at 23:17 -0500, clayasaurus wrote:
> The poll is simple.
> 
> Do you think the D compiler is ready to be called 1.0?
> 
> Say yes if D is working great for you and explain what you have done with it.
> 
> Say no if D is unusable in its current state, or if there is something about the compiler that really bothers you that should be fixed before 1.0.
> 
> I posted this poll out of a general curiousity to see how many out there think D is ready and if not why.
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Yes.
> 
>     My honest opinion, from the little bit I've used D for, is that the
> D compiler is ready for 1.0. Granted, I'm a little college student who
> is just trying to learn game programming (and I'm not too far into all
> the fancy algorithms like the big shots are), so take my opinion with a
> grain of salt.
> 
>     I've never run into any show stopper bugs recently, for a while, and
> I've used some basic templates, modules, bindings, libs, and the build
> utility (a BIG selling point for D IMO, especially if you get a
> graphical frontend for it, will make the newbs very happy, and make
> makefiles look like a waste of time, allow you to concentrate more on
> programming, which is D's purpose, increase programmer productivity).
> 
>     I think D is really great and it can definitely holds its own
> against other languages. I'm sure compiler bugs could be fixed for the
> next three years or so (bop the gofer, fix one another pops up).
> 
>    The general acceptance of D can only happen when 1.0 emerges,
> otherwise it is just a beta language, and it is percieved as a moving
> target, so writing large amounts of code for it can seem dangerous.
> 
> And for those who need more features, be patient and wait for 2.0?
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Just trying to generate some discussion, and see other peoples views. :-)
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Also, I know some do not want to discriminate between compiler/lib, but IMO it would be hard to rollout a solid lib if the compiler is under construction. I think phobos is solid as it is (maybe i'm ignorant), and that any great/radical improvement will have to come from a great open source lib, like ares or mango, or a behind the scenes redesign by the top-notch library writers floating around here.
> 
> 
> 

"Stewart Gordon" <smjg_1998@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:d2gnc1$otv$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> David Barrett wrote:
> <snip>
>> - I perceive a lack of interest among the D developer community.  I see lots of started projects, but few completed ones, and little progress in the meantime.
>
>> I can only assume *something* turned off these people who gave D a shot, and this increases my perceived risk around D.
>
> Or are you talking about projects that seem to have been abandoned without so much as something suitable to be a 1.0 release?

Yes.

Naturally, everything is a work in progress.  But I'm a Win32 programmer, and the last time I tried D (8 months ago) I spent more time hacking C header files than writing D code .  Anyway, I'd hoped the Core32 library would solve my needs, but it's still marked "Alpha", and the last forum post was in October of '04.

(Oye, I had totally forgotten about that experience.  Add "importing/converting C header files and linking with C libraries" to my "must have" list.  I mean, it's great that D can link with them, but so what if I can't use the header files?  h2d looks like a great, albeit abandoned start, but even the author asserts that the right place to do it is in the D compiler itself.)

And a further discouragement was in this thread of the Core32 project:

http://www.dsource.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=360

"I'm not in the mood to make large changes to parts of the library that already work. I signed up to be a caretaker, not an overhauler."

It sounds like Core32 -- an essential component of any D Win32 application -- has already been put on life support.  Hopefully I'm reading too much into an off comment.  But I note that the user whose patch was rejected never posted again.

And all languages have a high rate of abandonware.  But it's disheartening to look at Dsource and see:

Server Resources:
Mango The Mango Tree - Stable/Production
DSP - Pre-Alpha
CORBA - Alpha
D Server Platform - Pre-Alpha

Development Tools (15)
eclipseD - Alpha
Dig Dug - Alpha
DCoder Visual Studio.NET extensions - Beta
DCC D Compiler Collection - Planning
h2d .h to .d conversion tool  - Alpha
Bindings - Pre-Alpha
ddoc - Planning
Orion - Planning
leds - Beta
DGrammar - Planning
Hydrus - Pre-Alpha
molt - Alpha
Build - Beta
DManager - Alpha
GDB - Alpha

Libraries-GUI (8)
DWT - Pre-Alpha
Sinbad - Pre-Alpha
L8night - Alpha
Derelict - Alpha
unDig - Beta
dcouple - Pre-Alpha
CursesTUI - Pre-Alpha
DUI - Beta

Libraries-System (11)
Docoa - Planning
Concurrent - Alpha
Core32 - Alpha
Deimos - Alpha
swig4d - Alpha
lr-lalr - Pre-Alpha
dragon-stl - Pre-Alpha
sdbo - Alpha
dcurses - Pre-Alpha
dool - Beta
Walnut - Pre-Alpha

Games (5)
Deliria - Planning
Claytek 3D - Alpha
Rylix Rylix - Pre-Alpha
WarBots - Planning
FragBots - Planning

Misc. Apps (1)
dBerBible - Alpha

Charlie schrieb am Thu, 31 Mar 2005 12:10:36 -0600:
> Another thing, does anyone know who owns : http://www.minddrome.com/produtos/d/ : , when I search for D Programming Language on google this is the second result , and all the information is grossly out of date.

Daniel Yukio Yokomiso

On Thu, 31 Mar 2005 14:20:48 -0800, David Barrett wrote:


[snip]
> Build - Beta

Build is at release level 1.17 and is only 'beta' because there is one known outstanding issue that I'm awaiting user feedback from. Otherwise it would be in 'production' status. When that issue is resolved (actually I have a fix already done, just waiting confirmation) I'll move Build to 2.0 and call it 'production'.

(Note to 'pragma': Did you confirm if Build was inserting two "LIBRARY" entries into the .DEF file for DLL targets?)

-- 
Derek
Melbourne, Australia
1/04/2005 9:13:24 AM

"Ben Hinkle" <bhinkle@mathworks.com> wrote in message news:d2hnhl$1si1$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> I went to modify the Attributes page and I'm confused about what each section of the wiki page is for. There's "More Information","Examples","Message","Amendments" and "Links". Examples and Links I can understand (sortof) but the other three seem the same to me. I put my feedback under "Message" but that's because it says "Put your comments here". The others are blank and I have no idea who would fill
those
> in.

You put it in the right place.

> Other questions come to mind:
> Is there a summary page?

No.

> How often do these wiki's get looked at and what happens to the
suggestions?

I look at the wiki suggestions when I update the corresponding web page.

> Does anyone go through the wiki and make sure it makes sense and move
stuff
> around if not?

Anyone who wants to can. Me, I'll remove suggestions from the wiki once they are incorporated. They'll still remain in the wiki history, though.

David Barrett wrote:
> "Stewart Gordon" <smjg_1998@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:d2gnc1$otv$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> 
>>David Barrett wrote:
>><snip>
>>
>>>- I perceive a lack of interest among the D developer community.  I see lots of started projects, but few completed ones, and little progress in the meantime.
>>
>>>I can only assume *something* turned off these people who gave D a shot, and this increases my perceived risk around D.
>>
>>Or are you talking about projects that seem to have been abandoned without so much as something suitable to be a 1.0 release?
> 
> 
> Yes.
> 
> Naturally, everything is a work in progress.  But I'm a Win32 programmer, and the last time I tried D (8 months ago) I spent more time hacking C header files than writing D code .  Anyway, I'd hoped the Core32 library would solve my needs, but it's still marked "Alpha", and the last forum post was in October of '04.

If you don't like Core32, you might prefer Y Tomino's efforts:
http://hp.vector.co.jp/authors/VA028375/d/windows.h.html

It's a solid port and I think it's more complete than Core32.
> 
> (Oye, I had totally forgotten about that experience.  Add "importing/converting C header files and linking with C libraries" to my "must have" list.  I mean, it's great that D can link with them, but so what if I can't use the header files?  h2d looks like a great, albeit abandoned start, but even the author asserts that the right place to do it is in the D compiler itself.)
> 
> And a further discouragement was in this thread of the Core32 project:
> 
> http://www.dsource.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=360
> 
> "I'm not in the mood to make large changes to parts of the library that already work. I signed up to be a caretaker, not an overhauler."
> 
> It sounds like Core32 -- an essential component of any D Win32 application -- has already been put on life support.  Hopefully I'm reading too much into an off comment.  But I note that the user whose patch was rejected never posted again.

Was there a reason (or reasons) why the patch was rejected? I believe so. I don't think I offended the person who offered the patch, and if I did I'm sorry.

The original project leader of Core32 is MIA so I offered to fix it if it breaks. The "patch" that you seem to be referring to was a wholesale rewrite. I didn't see a problem that was being fixed. I didn't agree with the merit of the changes, so I declined making the changes to Core32. I was blunt, but I didn't mean to be rude.

I haven't checked to see it if still compiles with the latest DMD, but if someone alerts me to a problem I'll try to fix it.

> And all languages have a high rate of abandonware.  But it's disheartening to look at Dsource and see:

I suspect that part of the reason for this is that the newness of D attracts people that like to try new things. (Note that I said "try".) As D has been maturing there have been some growing pains. It can be annoying when you write code for DMD 0.65 and have to patch it for DMD 0.69 (and then it needs patching again for DMD 0.74). If you're like and don't produce code that fast, it's easy to fall off the upgrade treadmill. It's discouraging to spend more time

With D's current relative maturity, that's less of a problem, but some people from the early days may still be burned out. Personally, I haven't been writing much code recently.

And, besides, wxD isn't vaporware and DWT just produced a "Hello, World", so the sky's the limit. :)

-- 
jcc7
http://jcc_7.tripod.com/d/

Anders F Björklund wrote:
> Brad Anderson wrote:
> 
>> I understand that the ebuild works.  However, it's not in Portage.
> 
> 
> That's up to "politics", and the Gentoo maintainers...

It might be politics, but if we could persuade Walter to let D run for office D might "emerge" as the winner in a landslide. (Nyuk, nyuk, nyuk.)

Of course I'm not a Gentoo citizen, so I'm probably not allowed to vote--or even make any campaign contributions.

If I've read this thread correctly, Walter could get D on the ballot by making only one of these concessions:

1. Change the license to allow redistribution.
2. Versioned tarball (does the versioned zip count?).

Or maybe D is already eligible, but can't get nominated (I kind of got lost in this thread)...?

> 
> I just showed how to actually install the software. :-)

That's always helpful, too. ;)

> 
> --anders


-- 
jcc7
http://jcc_7.tripod.com/d/

David Barrett wrote:

> And all languages have a high rate of abandonware.  But it's disheartening to look at Dsource and see:
> 
> Server Resources:
> Mango The Mango Tree - Stable/Production
> DSP - Pre-Alpha
> CORBA - Alpha
> D Server Platform - Pre-Alpha
> 
> Development Tools (15)
> eclipseD - Alpha
> Dig Dug - Alpha
> DCoder Visual Studio.NET extensions - Beta
> DCC D Compiler Collection - Planning
> h2d .h to .d conversion tool  - Alpha
> Bindings - Pre-Alpha
> ddoc - Planning
> Orion - Planning
> leds - Beta
> DGrammar - Planning
> Hydrus - Pre-Alpha
> molt - Alpha
> Build - Beta
> DManager - Alpha
> GDB - Alpha
> 
> Libraries-GUI (8)
> DWT - Pre-Alpha
> Sinbad - Pre-Alpha
> L8night - Alpha
> Derelict - Alpha
> unDig - Beta
> dcouple - Pre-Alpha
> CursesTUI - Pre-Alpha
> DUI - Beta
> 
> Libraries-System (11)
> Docoa - Planning
> Concurrent - Alpha
> Core32 - Alpha
> Deimos - Alpha
> swig4d - Alpha
> lr-lalr - Pre-Alpha
> dragon-stl - Pre-Alpha
> sdbo - Alpha
> dcurses - Pre-Alpha
> dool - Beta
> Walnut - Pre-Alpha
> 
> Games (5)
> Deliria - Planning
> Claytek 3D - Alpha
> Rylix Rylix - Pre-Alpha
> WarBots - Planning
> FragBots - Planning
> 
> Misc. Apps (1)
> dBerBible - Alpha
> 
> 

What are you getting at? A number of those projects are active. Some are updated periodically. Many of them never got off the ground. Just check the repositories to see how many made an initial commit (which is usually revision 3 or 4) then never did anything again. That in itself says nothing tome about the quality of D, but says volumes about the motivation of the project maintainer. And motivation be affected by many factors (lack of time, laziness, lack of commitment, whatever), which *might* or *might not* include dissatisfaction with the language. This is par for the course on any free project hosting site. Care to count the number of abandoned projects on Sourceforge?

Or are you getting at how many projects are marked as planning/pre-alpha/alpha? For the large majority of them it's fairly accurate. Where's the problem there?

I just don't see how the number of abandoned/incomplete projects could be directly indicative of the failure of D to grab people and hold on to them. If a significant number of those projects were abandoned after a significant amount of effort had been put in to them (i.e. the maintainer demonstrated commitment, dedication, and strong potential to complete the project), then questioning if the language had something to do with it would make sense.

"David Barrett" <dbarrett@quinthar.com> wrote in message news:d2ht41$2265$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> And all languages have a high rate of abandonware.  But it's disheartening to look at Dsource and see:

I don't think it's disheartening at all. It takes a lot of commitment, time and work to take a project from initial prototype to a professional product, far more than most realize. D offers big productivity gains over C++, but it isn't a miracle language <g>, and the need for putting in the time to do a polished product isn't going to go away.

What I see is a lot of activity going on in D that is very heartening. This also shows in the big increase in bug reports in the D.bugs newsgroup. That means that lots of people are using it, and are pushing it hard.

I'm very familiar with how much work it takes to do a professional product, which is why I only very rarely start new ones. I keep upgrading and extending existing ones, heck, parts of DMD (the back end) were written back in 1982 <g>. I believe that DMC++ is the oldest compiler in existence still actively maintained. The Empire game started out in 1976 in BASIC, went to FORTRAN, then PDP-11 assembler, then C, then C++, and now there's a D version out. The amusing thing is there's still some of the old BASIC DNA in the code.