Gary Whatmore Wrote:

> Simen kjaeraas Wrote:
> 
> > Walter Bright <newshound2@digitalmars.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> > >> Compared to the talk at Google, I changed one of the "cool things" from
> > >> threading to operator overloading. Didn't manage to talk about that -
> > >> there were a million questions - although I think it's a great topic.
> > >>  http://erdani.com/tdpl/2010-12-08-ACCU.pdf
> > >
> > >
> > > Anyone care to do the honors and post this to reddit programming?
> > 
> > Done.
> > 
> > http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/eklq0/andrei_alexandrescus_talk_at_accu_silicon_valley/
> 
> Guys, I made several sockpuppet reddit accounts to mod down the two guys >criticising this thread. I recommend everyone to help us improve D's publicity by >ignoring these trolls and voting them down. It has worked before, too -- reddit >seems to fold the subthreads that get too many negative votes. This makes it >look much better than it is.
> 
>  - G.W.

That's absolutely pathetic, you're actually doing the community a disservice.

Mon, 13 Dec 2010 14:44:36 -0500, snk_kid wrote:

> Gary Whatmore Wrote:
> 
>> Simen kjaeraas Wrote:
>> 
>> > Walter Bright <newshound2@digitalmars.com> wrote:
>> > 
>> > > Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>> > >> Compared to the talk at Google, I changed one of the "cool things"
>> > >> from threading to operator overloading. Didn't manage to talk
>> > >> about that - there were a million questions - although I think
>> > >> it's a great topic.
>> > >>  http://erdani.com/tdpl/2010-12-08-ACCU.pdf
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Anyone care to do the honors and post this to reddit programming?
>> > 
>> > Done.
>> > 
>> > http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/eklq0/
andrei_alexandrescus_talk_at_accu_silicon_valley/
>> 
>> Guys, I made several sockpuppet reddit accounts to mod down the two guys >criticising this thread. I recommend everyone to help us improve D's publicity by >ignoring these trolls and voting them down. It has worked before, too -- reddit >seems to fold the subthreads that get too many negative votes. This makes it >look much better than it is.
>> 
>>  - G.W.
> 
> That's absolutely pathetic, you're actually doing the community a disservice.

I really don't know what to say. Take a look at

0 points: http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/eklq0/ andrei_alexandrescus_talk_at_accu_silicon_valley/c18swbi

or

-1 points: http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/eklq0/ andrei_alexandrescus_talk_at_accu_silicon_valley/c18sz8n

These say nothing against D. Why does one take them personally? They are both also highly informative. As far as I can tell, these two comments go much deeper in operator semantics theory than the combined effort of 68 other threads by Walter, Andrei et al. For example the precedence of operators can get problematic when using several libraries from various vendors.

Then you have:

http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/eklq0/ andrei_alexandrescus_talk_at_accu_silicon_valley/c18t1d5

"I really like D (2.0) and I wish it would take off."

7 points? WTF? What is the value of this reply? It's a purely subjective opinion and doesn't necessarily even beg for further discussion.

Why do /you/ take it personally?

On 12/14/10, retard <re@tard.com.invalid> wrote:
> Mon, 13 Dec 2010 14:44:36 -0500, snk_kid wrote:
>
>> Gary Whatmore Wrote:
>>
>>> Simen kjaeraas Wrote:
>>>
>>> > Walter Bright <newshound2@digitalmars.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>>> > >> Compared to the talk at Google, I changed one of the "cool things"
>>> > >> from threading to operator overloading. Didn't manage to talk
>>> > >> about that - there were a million questions - although I think
>>> > >> it's a great topic.
>>> > >>  http://erdani.com/tdpl/2010-12-08-ACCU.pdf
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > > Anyone care to do the honors and post this to reddit programming?
>>> >
>>> > Done.
>>> >
>>> > http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/eklq0/
> andrei_alexandrescus_talk_at_accu_silicon_valley/
>>>
>>> Guys, I made several sockpuppet reddit accounts to mod down the two guys >criticising this thread. I recommend everyone to help us improve D's publicity by >ignoring these trolls and voting them down. It has worked before, too -- reddit >seems to fold the subthreads that get too many negative votes. This makes it >look much better than it is.
>>>
>>>  - G.W.
>>
>> That's absolutely pathetic, you're actually doing the community a disservice.
>
> I really don't know what to say. Take a look at
>
> 0 points: http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/eklq0/ andrei_alexandrescus_talk_at_accu_silicon_valley/c18swbi
>
> or
>
> -1 points: http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/eklq0/ andrei_alexandrescus_talk_at_accu_silicon_valley/c18sz8n
>
> These say nothing against D. Why does one take them personally? They are both also highly informative. As far as I can tell, these two comments go much deeper in operator semantics theory than the combined effort of 68 other threads by Walter, Andrei et al. For example the precedence of operators can get problematic when using several libraries from various vendors.
>
> Then you have:
>
> http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/eklq0/ andrei_alexandrescus_talk_at_accu_silicon_valley/c18t1d5
>
> "I really like D (2.0) and I wish it would take off."
>
> 7 points? WTF? What is the value of this reply? It's a purely subjective opinion and doesn't necessarily even beg for further discussion.
>

Tue, 14 Dec 2010 02:56:45 +0100, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:

> Why do /you/ take it personally?

You've misunderstood. I only wish the discussion was a bit more technical and had less to do with opinions and hype. The reason is, a more technical approach might solve technical problems in more efficient way. But my goal is not to belittle social issues wrt language adoption. Surely I understand reddit isn't lambda-the-ultimate.org and I'm glad that the Go trolls didn't find the thread (yet). I just find this behavior incomprehensible.

My personal stance on this matter is that I believe a more consistent and flexible mechanism for operators would fit D. I'm also a bit more of a fan of C++0x concepts than those contraints shown in the slides. I haven't really thought how it all would work out, but if the atmosphere was more ambitious to this direction, I could participate more. But it seems my vision conflicts badly with what D2 has become.

> 
> On 12/14/10, retard <re@tard.com.invalid> wrote:
>> Mon, 13 Dec 2010 14:44:36 -0500, snk_kid wrote:
>>
>>> Gary Whatmore Wrote:
>>>
>>>> Simen kjaeraas Wrote:
>>>>
>>>> > Walter Bright <newshound2@digitalmars.com> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > > Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>>>> > >> Compared to the talk at Google, I changed one of the "cool
>>>> > >> things" from threading to operator overloading. Didn't manage to
>>>> > >> talk about that - there were a million questions - although I
>>>> > >> think it's a great topic.
>>>> > >>  http://erdani.com/tdpl/2010-12-08-ACCU.pdf
>>>> > >
>>>> > >
>>>> > > Anyone care to do the honors and post this to reddit programming?
>>>> >
>>>> > Done.
>>>> >
>>>> > http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/eklq0/
>> andrei_alexandrescus_talk_at_accu_silicon_valley/
>>>>
>>>> Guys, I made several sockpuppet reddit accounts to mod down the two guys >criticising this thread. I recommend everyone to help us improve D's publicity by >ignoring these trolls and voting them down. It has worked before, too -- reddit >seems to fold the subthreads that get too many negative votes. This makes it >look much better than it is.
>>>>
>>>>  - G.W.
>>>
>>> That's absolutely pathetic, you're actually doing the community a disservice.
>>
>> I really don't know what to say. Take a look at
>>
>> 0 points: http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/eklq0/ andrei_alexandrescus_talk_at_accu_silicon_valley/c18swbi
>>
>> or
>>
>> -1 points: http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/eklq0/ andrei_alexandrescus_talk_at_accu_silicon_valley/c18sz8n
>>
>> These say nothing against D. Why does one take them personally? They are both also highly informative. As far as I can tell, these two comments go much deeper in operator semantics theory than the combined effort of 68 other threads by Walter, Andrei et al. For example the precedence of operators can get problematic when using several libraries from various vendors.
>>
>> Then you have:
>>
>> http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/eklq0/ andrei_alexandrescus_talk_at_accu_silicon_valley/c18t1d5
>>
>> "I really like D (2.0) and I wish it would take off."
>>
>> 7 points? WTF? What is the value of this reply? It's a purely subjective opinion and doesn't necessarily even beg for further discussion.
>>

Why don't you retard, I mean eternium, I mean iLikeCakes, I mean snk_kid, I mean WeAreAllTreeBear, I mean bearophile's alter ego, go someplace else. Waisting time here is really not worth it. They provide psychiatric treatment in hospitals. I can't prove this conspiracy easily, but I also voted down your stupid remarks there. I hope this teaches you a lesson.

retard Wrote:

> Tue, 14 Dec 2010 02:56:45 +0100, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
> 
> > Why do /you/ take it personally?
> 
> You've misunderstood. I only wish the discussion was a bit more technical and had less to do with opinions and hype. The reason is, a more technical approach might solve technical problems in more efficient way. But my goal is not to belittle social issues wrt language adoption. Surely I understand reddit isn't lambda-the-ultimate.org and I'm glad that the Go trolls didn't find the thread (yet). I just find this behavior incomprehensible.
> 
> My personal stance on this matter is that I believe a more consistent and flexible mechanism for operators would fit D. I'm also a bit more of a fan of C++0x concepts than those contraints shown in the slides. I haven't really thought how it all would work out, but if the atmosphere was more ambitious to this direction, I could participate more. But it seems my vision conflicts badly with what D2 has become.
> 
> > 
> > On 12/14/10, retard <re@tard.com.invalid> wrote:
> >> Mon, 13 Dec 2010 14:44:36 -0500, snk_kid wrote:
> >>
> >>> Gary Whatmore Wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Simen kjaeraas Wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> > Walter Bright <newshound2@digitalmars.com> wrote:
> >>>> >
> >>>> > > Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> >>>> > >> Compared to the talk at Google, I changed one of the "cool
> >>>> > >> things" from threading to operator overloading. Didn't manage to
> >>>> > >> talk about that - there were a million questions - although I
> >>>> > >> think it's a great topic.
> >>>> > >>  http://erdani.com/tdpl/2010-12-08-ACCU.pdf
> >>>> > >
> >>>> > >
> >>>> > > Anyone care to do the honors and post this to reddit programming?
> >>>> >
> >>>> > Done.
> >>>> >
> >>>> > http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/eklq0/
> >> andrei_alexandrescus_talk_at_accu_silicon_valley/
> >>>>
> >>>> Guys, I made several sockpuppet reddit accounts to mod down the two guys >criticising this thread. I recommend everyone to help us improve D's publicity by >ignoring these trolls and voting them down. It has worked before, too -- reddit >seems to fold the subthreads that get too many negative votes. This makes it >look much better than it is.
> >>>>
> >>>>  - G.W.
> >>>
> >>> That's absolutely pathetic, you're actually doing the community a disservice.
> >>
> >> I really don't know what to say. Take a look at
> >>
> >> 0 points: http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/eklq0/ andrei_alexandrescus_talk_at_accu_silicon_valley/c18swbi
> >>
> >> or
> >>
> >> -1 points: http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/eklq0/ andrei_alexandrescus_talk_at_accu_silicon_valley/c18sz8n
> >>
> >> These say nothing against D. Why does one take them personally? They are both also highly informative. As far as I can tell, these two comments go much deeper in operator semantics theory than the combined effort of 68 other threads by Walter, Andrei et al. For example the precedence of operators can get problematic when using several libraries from various vendors.
> >>
> >> Then you have:
> >>
> >> http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/eklq0/ andrei_alexandrescus_talk_at_accu_silicon_valley/c18t1d5
> >>
> >> "I really like D (2.0) and I wish it would take off."
> >>
> >> 7 points? WTF? What is the value of this reply? It's a purely subjective opinion and doesn't necessarily even beg for further discussion.
> >>
> 

On Mon, Dec 13, 2010 at 8:50 PM, lurker <lurk@lurk.net> wrote:
>
> Why don't you retard, I mean eternium, I mean iLikeCakes, I mean snk_kid,
I mean WeAreAllTreeBear, I mean bearophile's alter ego, go someplace else. Waisting time here is really not worth it. They provide psychiatric treatment in hospitals. I can't prove this conspiracy easily, but I also voted down your stupid remarks there. I hope this teaches you a lesson.

+----------+
|  PLEASE  |
|  DO NOT  |
| FEED THE |
|  TROLLS  |
+----------+
    |  |
    |  |
  .\|.||/..
Also, it's spelled "wasting."

On Mon, 13 Dec 2010 20:50:43 -0600, lurker <lurk@lurk.net> wrote:

> Why don't you retard, I mean eternium, I mean iLikeCakes, I mean snk_kid, I mean WeAreAllTreeBear, I mean bearophile's alter ego, go someplace else. Waisting time here is really not worth it. They provide psychiatric treatment in hospitals. I can't prove this conspiracy easily, but I also voted down your stupid remarks there. I hope this teaches you a lesson.
>
> retard Wrote:
>
>> Tue, 14 Dec 2010 02:56:45 +0100, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
>>
>> > Why do /you/ take it personally?
>>
>> You've misunderstood. I only wish the discussion was a bit more technical
>> and had less to do with opinions and hype. The reason is, a more
>> technical approach might solve technical problems in more efficient way.
>> But my goal is not to belittle social issues wrt language adoption.
>> Surely I understand reddit isn't lambda-the-ultimate.org and I'm glad
>> that the Go trolls didn't find the thread (yet). I just find this
>> behavior incomprehensible.
>>
>> My personal stance on this matter is that I believe a more consistent and
>> flexible mechanism for operators would fit D. I'm also a bit more of a
>> fan of C++0x concepts than those contraints shown in the slides. I
>> haven't really thought how it all would work out, but if the atmosphere
>> was more ambitious to this direction, I could participate more. But it
>> seems my vision conflicts badly with what D2 has become.
>>
>> >
>> > On 12/14/10, retard <re@tard.com.invalid> wrote:
>> >> Mon, 13 Dec 2010 14:44:36 -0500, snk_kid wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> Gary Whatmore Wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>> Simen kjaeraas Wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> > Walter Bright <newshound2@digitalmars.com> wrote:
>> >>>> >
>> >>>> > > Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>> >>>> > >> Compared to the talk at Google, I changed one of the "cool
>> >>>> > >> things" from threading to operator overloading. Didn't manage  
>> to
>> >>>> > >> talk about that - there were a million questions - although I
>> >>>> > >> think it's a great topic.
>> >>>> > >>  http://erdani.com/tdpl/2010-12-08-ACCU.pdf
>> >>>> > >
>> >>>> > >
>> >>>> > > Anyone care to do the honors and post this to reddit  
>> programming?
>> >>>> >
>> >>>> > Done.
>> >>>> >
>> >>>> > http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/eklq0/
>> >> andrei_alexandrescus_talk_at_accu_silicon_valley/
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Guys, I made several sockpuppet reddit accounts to mod down the two
>> >>>> guys >criticising this thread. I recommend everyone to help us
>> >>>> improve D's publicity by >ignoring these trolls and voting them  
>> down.
>> >>>> It has worked before, too -- reddit >seems to fold the subthreads
>> >>>> that get too many negative votes. This makes it >look much better
>> >>>> than it is.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>  - G.W.
>> >>>
>> >>> That's absolutely pathetic, you're actually doing the community a
>> >>> disservice.
>> >>
>> >> I really don't know what to say. Take a look at
>> >>
>> >> 0 points: http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/eklq0/
>> >> andrei_alexandrescus_talk_at_accu_silicon_valley/c18swbi
>> >>
>> >> or
>> >>
>> >> -1 points: http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/eklq0/
>> >> andrei_alexandrescus_talk_at_accu_silicon_valley/c18sz8n
>> >>
>> >> These say nothing against D. Why does one take them personally? They
>> >> are both also highly informative. As far as I can tell, these two
>> >> comments go much deeper in operator semantics theory than the  
>> combined
>> >> effort of 68 other threads by Walter, Andrei et al. For example the
>> >> precedence of operators can get problematic when using several
>> >> libraries from various vendors.
>> >>
>> >> Then you have:
>> >>
>> >> http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/eklq0/
>> >> andrei_alexandrescus_talk_at_accu_silicon_valley/c18t1d5
>> >>
>> >> "I really like D (2.0) and I wish it would take off."
>> >>
>> >> 7 points? WTF? What is the value of this reply? It's a purely
>> >> subjective opinion and doesn't necessarily even beg for further
>> >> discussion.
>> >>
>>
>

Oh, retard using sockpuppets. Business as usual. :)

-- 
Yao G.

On 12/14/10, retard <re@tard.com.invalid> wrote:
> My personal stance on this matter is that I believe a more consistent and flexible mechanism for operators would fit D. I'm also a bit more of a fan of C++0x concepts than those contraints shown in the slides. I haven't really thought how it all would work out, but if the atmosphere was more ambitious to this direction, I could participate more.

You can always open up a new topic and discuss possible new features and/or changes for D.

On 12/13/10 8:30 PM, retard wrote:
> Tue, 14 Dec 2010 02:56:45 +0100, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
>
>> Why do /you/ take it personally?
>
> You've misunderstood. I only wish the discussion was a bit more technical
> and had less to do with opinions and hype. The reason is, a more
> technical approach might solve technical problems in more efficient way.
> But my goal is not to belittle social issues wrt language adoption.
> Surely I understand reddit isn't lambda-the-ultimate.org and I'm glad
> that the Go trolls didn't find the thread (yet). I just find this
> behavior incomprehensible.

Well a reddit discussion is a reddit discussion opened to all flaws of reddit's voting system. No need to get annoyed over it.

I enjoy reading snc_kid's posts, clearly knows the book. If anything I'd want snc_kid to hang out more around here and provide good criticism. Generally I'd much wish D's naysayers were simply of better quality; the likes of iLiekCaeks and eternium are just not all that competent.

> My personal stance on this matter is that I believe a more consistent and
> flexible mechanism for operators would fit D.

That would be interesting. In the best-case scenario, what do you think would be the positive impact of the flexible operators, as you envision them, on the language?

> I'm also a bit more of a
> fan of C++0x concepts than those contraints shown in the slides. I
> haven't really thought how it all would work out, but if the atmosphere
> was more ambitious to this direction, I could participate more. But it
> seems my vision conflicts badly with what D2 has become.

In all honesty, it is difficult to infer your vision from the trail of your posts.

As of C++ concepts, let me mention a few facts fresh from the source (I literally collected them an hour ago). C++ concepts are dead, buried, and decomposing. Nobody is working on them and there is exactly one guy in the world still talking about them. For a variety of theoretical and practical purposes, they will never make it in C++.

D's constrained templates were introduced on 17 June 2008 and they've been a smashing hit. Virtually all of Phobos uses them, and I'm sure a lot of generic client code. They take half a minute to explain and solve a difficult problem in a very simple manner.

I'm not saying you can't convince that C++-style concepts would be superior. I'm saying you'll need to bring some solid evidence to the table. If you don't, please don't claim you're being ostracized :o).


Andrei

Andrei:

>D's constrained templates were introduced on 17 June 2008 and they've been a smashing hit. Virtually all of Phobos uses them, and I'm sure a lot of generic client code. They take half a minute to explain and solve a difficult problem in a very simple manner.<

A template with two constrains makes it less handy to add error messages that explain why the instantiation has failed:

template Foo(T) if (Pred1!T && Pred2!T) {
    ...
}


An alternative syntax (same semantics) similar to a (static) precondition Contract gives more space for error messages:

template Foo(T)
    static in {
        static assert(Pred1!T, "err msg 1");
        static assert(Pred2!T, "err msg 2");
    } body {
        ...
    }

Function templates too may have the optional static precondition, before the optional (run time) precondition.

Bye,
bearophile