On 09/08/2014 07:00 PM, Marco Leise wrote:
> Am Mon, 8 Sep 2014 18:34:10 +0300
> schrieb ketmar via Digitalmars-d <digitalmars-d@puremagic.com>:
>
>> On Mon, 08 Sep 2014 17:25:07 +0200
>> Timon Gehr via Digitalmars-d <digitalmars-d@puremagic.com> wrote:
>>
>>> int square(int x)=>x*x;
>> noted.
>
> To clarify:

The above is not valid D 2.066 syntax.
Your apparent confusion supports a point I made in favour of it some time ago though. My post was about function declaration syntax, not squaring numbers. I assume Ola will still want to support x² though. :o)

> There is x^^2, but the implementation uses pow(x,2)

Is this really still true?

> and presumably yields a "real" result

No, both pow(x,2) and x^^2 yield an 'int' result.

"Timon Gehr"  wrote in message news:luko1s$otb$1@digitalmars.com... 

> > There is x^^2, but the implementation uses pow(x,2)
> 
> Is this really still true?

x^^2 will be optimized by the fronend to x*x

On Mon, 8 Sep 2014 18:55:46 +0200
Marco Leise via Digitalmars-d <digitalmars-d@puremagic.com> wrote:

> but #arr looks very unusual
not for those who loves Lua. ;-)

On Monday, 8 September 2014 at 15:22:05 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote:
> On Monday, 8 September 2014 at 15:09:27 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
>> It is not about D community but about yourself. Do _you_ want to be viewed as a valuable member of community? Do _you_ want to receive on topic responses to your threads?
>
> I only want to receive a response on this thread from community members who are willing to share their patches! Your contribution to this thread is counter productive.

And I don't give a fuck what you expect because this thread encourages counter-productive and harmful attitude to the language. So yes, expect it to be ruined by off-topic flamewar, as well as any similar thread, this is quite intentional.

> Ketmar is a noble example that I'd encourage others to follow. More people like him would bring D out of stagnation.

And I won't let you do that easily. Not in this NG at least.

>> If answer is yes, you will consider people expectation as much as a license.
>
> No, I don't consider other people's disparage expectations on this topic. I consider the orignal author's choice of license. I am sure he considered the licensing-options and stands for his own choice. If he does not, then an explanation from the original author is in place.

And there are no NG rules that say I shouldn't write some off-topic bullshit in your threads. Also clearly the only reason why we don't casually walk around shooting people is because laws prohibit doing so, otherwise it is perfectly reasonable thing to do.

>>> We add to the eco system. We don't detract from it.
>>
>> Bullshit. Any kind of forking wastes most valuable resource open source world can possibly have - developer attention.
>
> Uhm, no. I would not use D in it's current incarnation so I need to modify it. Ketmar and I are not DMD developers. We are currently digging into the code base. Modifying the parser is a good way to learn the AST. Maybe we one day will become DMD developers, but this attitude you and others are exposing in this thread and the bug-report-patch thread aint sexy. It's a turn off.

Yeah, sadly I don't buy this "I wanted to contribute but now I am so discouraged" attention whore crap. Andrei / Walter usually appreciate it being public spokeperson but I have no such concerns and don't care about a difference between a forum troll and retard.

Same as I don't really care what is your _personal_ go on D usage and what custom patches you have (or just pretend to have to troll real contributors). You are crossing the line when you come to the official NG and start telling people "hey guys it feels like a good day to screw this language a bit more". This is where I stop pretending to be a civilized person.

> What you are doing is telling prospective contributors that this community is about cohesive military discipline. Totalitarian regimes tend to run into trouble. I most definitely will never join a cult that expose it as an ideal. I'm not one of your lieutenants. Sorry.

Exactly the kind of demagogue rhetorics referenced xkcd comic makes fun of. It is quite ironical that people tend to call least restricted environments totalitarian because it not only allows them to do things but also face the reaction of other people which is (surprisingly!) different from expected ones. Because if we actually had any sort of military discipline I'd had to comply to official "be nice to everyone" attitude. Fortunately I don't have to. Same as you don't have to respect my or Daniel opinion.

On Monday, 8 September 2014 at 16:02:35 UTC, Joakim wrote:
> On Monday, 8 September 2014 at 15:09:27 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
>> Bullshit. Any kind of forking wastes most valuable resource open source world can possibly have - developer attention. In limited form it is compensated by ecnouraged competition and breaking possible stagantion. When it becomes casual it is a single biggest killer of all open source projects.
>
> Yet it is part of the freedom of open source, as Ola and ketmar have pointed out.  In any case, trading syntax patches with each other and experimenting with different dialects, which is all they've said they're doing so far, is far from a full fork.
>  I see no reason for you to come down so hard on such experimentation.

Because original post had no learning context at all. I would gladly support initiative to provide more example-based tutorials for DMD contribution. Or any call for feedback based on existing patches. But it has nothing like that, instead focusing on "here is what I like to change in D so I keep local patches it" side of things. And this is really bad.

Nothing is perfect and freedoms of open source come with their own drawbacks. I still find the benefits worth it but that doesn't mean that does mean that drawbacks are to be liked. Sometimes social aspect can be used as a counter-measure of technical flaw.

On Monday, 8 September 2014 at 23:39:17 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
> On Monday, 8 September 2014 at 16:02:35 UTC, Joakim wrote:
>> On Monday, 8 September 2014 at 15:09:27 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
>>> Bullshit. Any kind of forking wastes most valuable resource open source world can possibly have - developer attention. In limited form it is compensated by ecnouraged competition and breaking possible stagantion. When it becomes casual it is a single biggest killer of all open source projects.
>>
>> Yet it is part of the freedom of open source, as Ola and ketmar have pointed out.  In any case, trading syntax patches with each other and experimenting with different dialects, which is all they've said they're doing so far, is far from a full fork.
>> I see no reason for you to come down so hard on such experimentation.
>
> Because original post had no learning context at all. I would gladly support initiative to provide more example-based tutorials for DMD contribution. Or any call for feedback based on existing patches. But it has nothing like that, instead focusing on "here is what I like to change in D so I keep local patches it" side of things. And this is really bad.
>
> Nothing is perfect and freedoms of open source come with their own drawbacks. I still find the benefits worth it but that doesn't mean that does mean that drawbacks are to be liked. Sometimes social aspect can be used as a counter-measure of technical flaw.

To stress this point a bit more - constant bikeshedding is already one the major problems with D development culture. Everyone has his own opinion about the best syntax sugar or key features missing. One thing I respect established DMD contributors for is that they are capable of prioritizing the bigger picture over own preferences, despite the fact there is no one actually defining that bigger picture. If anything, I'd much more appreciate a real full-blown fork with a different vision (there are actually few already present) than encouraging a fragmentation over trivialities.

Am Mon, 8 Sep 2014 20:27:41 +0300
schrieb ketmar via Digitalmars-d <digitalmars-d@puremagic.com>:

> On Mon, 8 Sep 2014 18:55:46 +0200
> Marco Leise via Digitalmars-d <digitalmars-d@puremagic.com> wrote:
> 
> > but #arr looks very unusual
> not for those who loves Lua. ;-)

... an Perl and Bash, yes.

-- 
Marco

On 09/08/2014 04:58 PM, "Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQi?= <ola.fosheim.grostad+dlang@gmail.com>" wrote:
>
>comics are not on topic,

The topic of a comic is arbitrary.

Am Mon, 08 Sep 2014 23:31:47 +0000
schrieb "Dicebot" <public@dicebot.lv>:

> […] fuck […] off-topic flamewar […] quite intentional.
> […] won't let you do that easily […] off-topic bullshit
> […] shooting people […] don't buy this […] attention whore
> […] troll […] retard […] You are crossing the line
> […] screw this language […] demagogue rhetorics
> […] face the reaction

*gulp*

On Mon, 08 Sep 2014 23:39:15 +0000
Dicebot via Digitalmars-d <digitalmars-d@puremagic.com> wrote:

> Because original post had no learning context at all.
and we have no NG to ask such questions. this NGs is the main point of connection for D users. where he should ask his question if not here? we have no "D.experiments" or such (as i written before), and this is not for "D.learning" too. so... ah, yes, i see: he can start his own forum then. and answer his own questions by himself. right?

you are overreacting. this is not the post "let's do five more incompatible D versions!", neither "let's start crusade!". OP just asking what private patches other has. that's all.

it's exactly like my thread about code cleanup, which turned to "github or GTFO" thread, yet i just informed people and don't even use word "github" there.

i can't see how we can hurt D by talking about our experiments. yet i clearly see how *you* can hurt D with "never do anything that is not blessed by the Gods or you will be punished!" attitude.

let me stress it: this it NOT ABOUT FORKING AT ALL. this is about "hey, people, tell me about things your playing with in your free time!" and now you telling us that we should stop playing with *free* *and* *open* *code*. or at least be ashamed of what we are doing. i'm not sure that this is the good way to get more contributors. you killing "fun factor", which is the main driving force of FOSS (besides money, of course).

we all have jobs, and families, and life besides D. yet some of us loves
D so much that we are willingly spending our free time studying compiler
source code. yes, adding seemingly useless features is one of many ways
to learn compiler internals. and closing way of communication is one of
the best ways to turning people off completely. or at least convert
'em from "potential contributors" to "silent users". so silent that
they not interested in spreading the word even to their friends, less
so to workmates.

please, don't turn such people off. 'cause your posts make me think that making my own independend D fork is not such a bad idea after all. maybe Ola too. then our forks will inevitable diverges so much that any of our code will be unusable for "mainline" compiler (and "mainline" code for ours). lose-lose. we'll eventually drop our forks and whole D with them. and then our friends and workmates will say: "ah, that's so understandable... we are glad that you stoped playing with your new shiny toy, now let's return to the *real* *language*."

people make patches 'cause they like D, not 'cause they hate D. it's not harmful. forcing such people to leave official NG will not do any good.