== Quote from Walter Bright (newshound1@digitalmars.com)'s article
> Jeremie Pelletier wrote:
> > watching wrote:
> >> most programmer want use the language and a lot libraries that come
> >> with it. instead of gui, db etc. you guys discuss until all
> >> prospective users are gone off to use something that lets them do the job
> >>
> >> maybe it is time to put a large effort into libraries by all the bright people that are arroung d.
> >
> > The IDE I'm developing is exactly for that purpose, to bring more people to D and to make writing D code more convenient.
> Exactly, and I'm most pleased to see you and others stepping up to fill in the gaps.
> > The D language doesn't need to come with tons of libraries out of the box, its a systems language after all; C++ only comes with the STL and C with the stdlib, you need platform headers and third party libraries to do something more than a simple console program.
> While that's true that C and C++ became successful with minimal
> libraries, I think the bar is much higher these days. Looking at the go
> library, there's a lot in there we could use in the D library.
> http://golang.org/pkg/
> The library is licensed under the
> http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/
> meaning we can adapt it to D.

I thought (I'm not 100% sure on either of these counts) that:

1.  We don't want anything in Phobos that requires attribution for works distributed exclusively in binary form, even if the license is otherwise permissive.  This means we can't use BSD-licensed code in Phobos.

2.  Creative commons isn't entirely clear about whether attribution would be required for stuff distributed in pure binary form.

Walter Bright wrote:
> Jeremie Pelletier wrote:
>> watching wrote:
>>> most programmer want use the language and a lot libraries that come with it. instead of gui, db etc. you guys discuss until all prospective users are gone off to use something that lets them do the job
>>>
>>> maybe it is time to put a large effort into libraries by all the bright people that are arroung d. 
>>
>> The IDE I'm developing is exactly for that purpose, to bring more people to D and to make writing D code more convenient.
> 
> Exactly, and I'm most pleased to see you and others stepping up to fill in the gaps.

Thanks!

>> The D language doesn't need to come with tons of libraries out of the box, its a systems language after all; C++ only comes with the STL and C with the stdlib, you need platform headers and third party libraries to do something more than a simple console program.
> 
> While that's true that C and C++ became successful with minimal libraries, I think the bar is much higher these days. Looking at the go library, there's a lot in there we could use in the D library.
> 
> http://golang.org/pkg/
> 
> The library is licensed under the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/
> meaning we can adapt it to D.

It's true that the bar for bundled libraries is higher nowadays; I wouldn't touch C++ without boost for one.

The go library is rather impressive, I'm used to seeing that much out of the box only in interpreted languages. In any ways its only a matter of time before phobos catches on.

>> In any ways, I believe its a good thing to use multiple languages to better understand the differences between them, the end result doesn't change. I could've used java, C#, python or even mozilla's XUL with javascript and the IDE would've been the same.
> 
> I disagree, as then the IDE would be dependent on those large ecosystems. One nice thing about native apps is they stand alone.
> 
> One thing I do suggest is writing it in a "D-ish" style so that it will be easier to translate to D at some point.

That's what I'm already doing, the STL and boost make it much easier to do. I have string_t, wstring_t and dstring_t types derived from std::basic_string to cover D strings, as well as ustring_t which is set to the platform's native unicode encoding. I derived std::exception into Exception and Error to behave like D's exceptions, used boost::lexical_cast to create to<>() templates, I'm using struct and class as they would be used in D (POD vs polymorphic object) using only single inheritance and a lot of other support code to make a future port as easy and straightforward as possible.


Jeremie

dsimcha wrote:
> I thought (I'm not 100% sure on either of these counts) that:
> 
> 1.  We don't want anything in Phobos that requires attribution for works
> distributed exclusively in binary form, even if the license is otherwise
> permissive.  This means we can't use BSD-licensed code in Phobos.

Right.

> 2.  Creative commons isn't entirely clear about whether attribution would be
> required for stuff distributed in pure binary form.

Hmm. That would be a problem.

Jeremie Pelletier wrote:
> That's what I'm already doing, the STL and boost make it much easier to do. I have string_t, wstring_t and dstring_t types derived from std::basic_string to cover D strings, as well as ustring_t which is set to the platform's native unicode encoding. I derived std::exception into Exception and Error to behave like D's exceptions, used boost::lexical_cast to create to<>() templates, I'm using struct and class as they would be used in D (POD vs polymorphic object) using only single inheritance and a lot of other support code to make a future port as easy and straightforward as possible.

Awesome! Great minds think alike!

On Thu, 12 Nov 2009 14:34:31 -0500, Walter Bright <newshound1@digitalmars.com> wrote:

> dsimcha wrote:
>> I thought (I'm not 100% sure on either of these counts) that:
>>  1.  We don't want anything in Phobos that requires attribution for works
>> distributed exclusively in binary form, even if the license is otherwise
>> permissive.  This means we can't use BSD-licensed code in Phobos.
>
> Right.
>
>> 2.  Creative commons isn't entirely clear about whether attribution would be
>> required for stuff distributed in pure binary form.
>
> Hmm. That would be a problem.

Binary form counts as a derivative work, so unless it's specifically waived you have to included it.

@Jeremie:
Good work!! Nice IDE.

@watching:
The fact that you dare not say your name, and post here anonymously says everything. Not only your reply has any credit (too subjective), but it is also disrespectful.
It is not problem of the D community that some people do not understand the power the D programming language gives to developers.

seems like you are that you hit on the spot. never the less i like the language -  i am a user and i can't use. the language is sweet and i hope they get their act together and integrate tango. what's missing then is some db stuff and the pre-canned qt.
for editors there is codeblocks, uestudio and some other debuggers ....

make your languguage for customer/user not the scientist.

am i disrespectful - i hope so. this thingy has to change from the ivorytower to the main stream.


Dejan Lekic Wrote:

> 
> @Jeremie:
> Good work!! Nice IDE.
> 
> @watching:
> The fact that you dare not say your name, and post here anonymously says
> everything. Not only your reply has any credit (too subjective), but it is
> also disrespectful.
> It is not problem of the D community that some people do not understand
> the power the D programming language gives to developers.

On Thu, Nov 12, 2009 at 20:34, Walter Bright <newshound1@digitalmars.com> wrote:
> dsimcha wrote:
>>
>> I thought (I'm not 100% sure on either of these counts) that:
>>
>> 1.  We don't want anything in Phobos that requires attribution for works distributed exclusively in binary form, even if the license is otherwise permissive.  This means we can't use BSD-licensed code in Phobos.
>
> Right.
>
>> 2.  Creative commons isn't entirely clear about whether attribution would
>> be
>> required for stuff distributed in pure binary form.
>
> Hmm. That would be a problem.
>

I would assume only the documentation is cc-licensed, as far as I can remember all of Go was released using the MIT license or similar.

-- 
Anders Bergh

Wed, 11 Nov 2009 10:00:58 +0100, grauzone wrote:

> Jeremie Pelletier wrote:
>> It's been some time since I last posted to this newsgroup, I've been quite busy these past weeks!
>> 
>> Among other things, I started writing an IDE for D from scratch and opened a SourceForge project for it a few minutes ago, I'll also open a dsource project to link to the sf one in the following days.
>> 
>> At first I tried to code it in D using wxD but soon found out the limitations of these bindings, then I tried to write my own wxWidgets bindings which worked great until i realized I was leaking memory like hell and had a hard time linking garbage collected D objects to C++ reference counted objects without adding complex overhead.
>> 
>> So after spending two weeks on these failed attempts, I jumped back into C++ after two years of almost only writing D code, this time using boost, and boy is that library sweet!
> 
> Oh dear, that's not good publicity for D... I know the implementation language doesn't really matter, but it's just not good publicity.

Well, you sometimes have to accept that if the language isn't really production quality yet, it's counterproductive to use it for real world projects. When developing the IDE with C++, he will probably not run into that many compiler bugs. With D each 500..1000 lines of code would probably expose at least one bug.

On 11/11/2009 04:22, Jeremie Pelletier wrote:
> Among other things, I started writing an IDE for D from scratch and
> opened a SourceForge project for it a few minutes ago, I'll also open a
> dsource project to link to the sf one in the following days.
>
> Jeremie

Very good name, pretty cool looking tool.
a few notes :

I think in order to create an IDE which supports larger projects you should integrate a Source Code Management System.

D2 becomes reality , so drop D1 support.

Publish the Plug-In Interface ASAP.