Another video from Lang.NEXT 2012 went live recently: [1]. Erik Meijer is joined by Andrew Adams-Moran, Walter and Andrei to discuss various topics surrounding D and Haskell. Most of the things covered probably aren't particularly new to most of the people here, but publicity for D is alway nice to see (also don't miss Andrei's humorous remark on the editor war).

One topic I found very interesting, but which was unfortunately barely covered within the constrained time, is the question about what »dirty laundry« is there for D, the language, right now (i.e. features/aspects that turned out to be more of a liability than profit). Sure, bit is an example, but that has been disposed of a long time ago. What has piled up in the basket since then?

David


[1] http://channel9.msdn.com/Blogs/Charles/Alexandrescu-Bright-Meijer-Moran-Pure-versus-Native-and-much-more

David Nadlinger:

> http://channel9.msdn.com/Blogs/Charles/Alexandrescu-Bright-Meijer-Moran-Pure-versus-Native-and-much-more

Good chat, but too much short :-) Compared to the others Walter seems a less noisy person.

D language surely has some things to learn from Haskell (like its syntax sugar for tuples usage).

I think the problem of ~100 open pull requests needs to be faced better. People that see their patches rot in that list probably don't feel rewarded enough to submit more patches.

Bye,
bearophile

> I think the problem of ~100 open pull requests needs to be faced better. People that see their patches rot in that list probably don't feel rewarded enough to submit more patches.

So true. I won't do any further work if it's in vain anyway.
Also I regularly have to rebase my one cause of conflicts, which is annoying.

I really wonder what Walter's doing. Is he still running the whole testsuite instead of relying on the autotester?

On 18-04-2012 11:00, Trass3r wrote:
>> I think the problem of ~100 open pull requests needs to be faced
>> better. People that see their patches rot in that list probably don't
>> feel rewarded enough to submit more patches.
>
> So true. I won't do any further work if it's in vain anyway.
> Also I regularly have to rebase my one cause of conflicts, which is
> annoying.
>
> I really wonder what Walter's doing. Is he still running the whole
> testsuite instead of relying on the autotester?

Just looking at the auto tester, there seems to be tons of stuff that can readily be merged...

-- 
- Alex

On 18/04/12 12:19, Alex Rønne Petersen wrote:
> On 18-04-2012 11:00, Trass3r wrote:
>>> I think the problem of ~100 open pull requests needs to be faced
>>> better. People that see their patches rot in that list probably don't
>>> feel rewarded enough to submit more patches.
>>
>> So true. I won't do any further work if it's in vain anyway.
>> Also I regularly have to rebase my one cause of conflicts, which is
>> annoying.
>>
>> I really wonder what Walter's doing. Is he still running the whole
>> testsuite instead of relying on the autotester?
>
> Just looking at the auto tester, there seems to be tons of stuff that
> can readily be merged...
>

One problem is github. IMHO github's pull requests are quite ridiculous, there is no way to prioritize them.
There are quite a lot of pull requests in there which are doubtful, high-risk, or require a lot of time to evaluate. Currently, we don't have a way to deal with them.

But, the announce list is not the appropriate place for this discussion.
Please move to the main list if you want to comment further.

Le 18/04/2012 00:49, David Nadlinger a écrit :
> Another video from Lang.NEXT 2012 went live recently: [1]. Erik Meijer
> is joined by Andrew Adams-Moran, Walter and Andrei to discuss various
> topics surrounding D and Haskell. Most of the things covered probably
> aren't particularly new to most of the people here, but publicity for D
> is alway nice to see (also don't miss Andrei's humorous remark on the
> editor war).
>
> One topic I found very interesting, but which was unfortunately barely
> covered within the constrained time, is the question about what »dirty
> laundry« is there for D, the language, right now (i.e. features/aspects
> that turned out to be more of a liability than profit). Sure, bit is an
> example, but that has been disposed of a long time ago. What has piled
> up in the basket since then?
>
> David
>
>
> [1]
> http://channel9.msdn.com/Blogs/Charles/Alexandrescu-Bright-Meijer-Moran-Pure-versus-Native-and-much-more
>

yum on debian systems ????

Don Clugston wrote:
> One problem is github. IMHO github's pull requests are quite ridiculous,
> there is no way to prioritize them.

There are issue labels, for example: https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/issues?labels=Priority+Medium&sort=created&direction=desc&state=open&page=1

Some of them are pull requests. I wonder if it's possible to enable issues tab for pulls only.

On 4/17/2012 9:00 PM, bearophile wrote:
> I think the problem of ~100 open pull requests needs to be faced better. People
> that see their patches rot in that list probably don't feel rewarded enough to
> submit more patches.


Consider that 8 out of 9 submitted pull requests for dmd have been pulled, and the current unpulled list does not include solutions for issues people are regarding as critical blockers.

On Wednesday, 18 April 2012 at 17:05:08 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
> On 4/17/2012 9:00 PM, bearophile wrote:
> > I think the problem of ~100 open pull requests needs to be
> faced better. People
> > that see their patches rot in that list probably don't feel
> rewarded enough to
> > submit more patches.
>
>
> Consider that 8 out of 9 submitted pull requests for dmd have been pulled, and the current unpulled list does not include solutions for issues people are regarding as critical blockers.

It might be a good policy to have the submitter (or even yourself) close pull requests that aren't ready for merging and reopen them once they are ready to be reviewed. This would help make the queue more manageable and easier to see what's ready to consider and what is not (it's a shame pull requests don't have simple tagging/labeling like GitHub's issues).

Regards,
Brad Anderson

On Wednesday, 18 April 2012 at 17:05:08 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
> Consider that 8 out of 9 submitted pull requests for dmd have been pulled

Another thing to consider is some of them are waiting
for other reasons.

My pull requests, for example, are waiting on ME to
address a comment and I haven't gotten around to it yet.

I don't think you can tell that by looking at it in github.
Who knows how many others are in a similar condition.