On Friday, 4 September 2015 at 18:27:14 UTC, Laeeth Isharc wrote:

> Sometimes it's really worth putting energy into ensuring crisp
> definitions.  This isn't one of those cases.  Your own language is
> exploiting polysemy in an unstraightforward manner - mixing up
> different meanings to achieve a rhetorical effect.  Quite clearly
> Walter+Andrei listen to what people say, but it doesn't thereby
> follow that they should listen to people who think D should go
> in a completely different direction based on a very theoretical
> view of things and who have no evident experience in writing
> a compiler used on a large scale, or in developing a language
> community.

Define your target before designing, that is the essence here. This is critical to gain wide adoption. D has been defined to be a cross platform system level progrmming language. That is what D should be evaluated as. "customer" is a nonsensical term that essentially means what?

> It's Business 101 that you shouldn't listen to what most people
> tell you, because whilst often well-meaning it's based on an
> understanding of things different from the practical situation one
> faces and that doesn't always understand what one is trying to
> achieve.

Defining who your target is does communicate what you are trying to achieve!

This is critical if you want to evaluate and drive the systems development process forward. You cannot fix the process if you don't know how you measure progress.


> Thank the Lord!  I really don't see how anyone can seriously believe
> that this is an appropriate model for D for the foreseeable future.

You compared D to C, not me. I know many appropriate system development models...

> process to establish, but I do note that even some of those involved
> in such processes would readily admit that waterfalls are evil, if
> necessary at that stage.

You are taking this too far, all non-chatoic models have a design-implement-evaluate pattern in them that, the difference is in how the iterations go.

A language specification is a critical work document that expose qualities of the language. Bypassing that affects quality.

At this stage D needs a specification.

> This is why you come across as a bit academic and not always constructive.
> You suggested things weren't developing,

I said that adding performance features during refactoring communicates a lack of direction. Macro level refactoring is needed and challemging snd takes leadership.

> nonetheless it's true.  D is running on embedded systems, and it
> sounds like it was a pain because of the runtime but not because of
> any horrible flaw in the language that means it cannot be considered
> a systems language if you want it to be.

It does not matter if it runs on embedded or not, unless your "customers" are defined as that market. Nobody serious about development cares if D runs on embedded if there are cheaper and more suitable alternatives. It only matters if you are the best alternative.

Engineers don't look for the next-best solution. They look for the best. So to gain ground you need to define your key goals with your design.

> obvious from the inside simply isn't from the outside.  CTOs are
> not gifted with some magic ability to see through appearances to
> the Platonic essences of things.  They are human and have a tough
> job.  So one needs to make an effort if they are to easily appreciate
> the value.

There are so few system level programming languages that the landscspe is easy to grasp. People are waiting for mature solutions that are better than what they have...

Marketing does not affect this. Focus and improved process does.

> "I am not calling D a toy language"
> "As it stands today both Rust and D falls into the category toy-languages."
>
> Make up your mind.

I said "if D is a toy language". That is not calling it anything. But it is, like Rust, a toy language by academic use of the phrase which is not a pejorative term, but an affectionate term in my book. The pejorative term is to call a language a "hack". C++ is a hack. String mixins is a hack. Etc.

> But this simply isn't the case, and it strikes me that you're
> manufacturing words to suit how you feel, rather than basing how
> you feel on things as they are.

No. There are plenty of visible artifacts from the process. No need to manufacture anything.


>> If you scaled up C++ to D based on resources and usage then C++
>> should have 100s of free compilers. You have 2 free C++14 compilers.
>
> If you scaled up the institutions and mores of Norway to the size of
> and conditions applying to the US you would have a very odd country
> indeed.

There is only one community driven C++14 compiler, g++. The other ones are primarily commercial.

 > One may legitimately have the
> view
> that the projects should be consolidated, but one would have to
> actually make an argument for it in the Russian style of
>  close-reasoning.

You dont have to consolidate anything. You need to look at the causes that has led to fragmentation in the past, so you can improve the process today. Then you need to see if you are using resources effectively or if you accumulate costs you can remove.

> My sincere view is that if you adopted a different approach you
> would be more effective in your influence.  And there might be
> broader beneficial effects too.

And it is wrong, you cannot have process improvement without either leadership support, consensus or more likely a high level of fuzz (end user pressure).

Actually, in the point cloud on the web demo I've linked before, which is
EXTREMELY compute intensive code, we experience a barely measurable loss in
performance between pnacl and native code. 20% loss would be huge, but we
see nothing like that, probably within 5% is closer to our experience.
On 5 Sep 2015 3:11 am, "deadalnix via Digitalmars-d" <
digitalmars-d@puremagic.com> wrote:

> On Friday, 4 September 2015 at 14:56:48 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote:
>
>> On Friday, 4 September 2015 at 14:45:39 UTC, rsw0x wrote:
>>
>>> Because it has the path of least resistance. It's still a poor technology that is just treating the symptoms.
>>>
>>
>> pnacl/pepper is not good either, they are both poor technologies.
>>
>>
> Statement do not makes arguements. pNaCl is portable, take only a 20% hit compared to pure native and is compact to send through the wire.
>
>

On 9/4/2015 7:52 AM, Manu via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> [...]

Sadly, your newsgroup software is back to doing double posts - once in plaintext, once in html.

On 5 September 2015 at 14:14, Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d <digitalmars-d@puremagic.com> wrote:
> On 9/4/2015 7:52 AM, Manu via Digitalmars-d wrote:
>>
>> [...]
>
>
> Sadly, your newsgroup software is back to doing double posts - once in plaintext, once in html.

My software in this case was the mail client on Android.
I'm astonished this isn't a rampant problem; mail clients seem to do
this by default. I have not configured it in any special way, not
changed a single setting... this is default settings for the worlds
most popular mail client (gmail).
How can I possibly be the only offender here?

On 5 Sep 2015 6:31 am, "Manu via Digitalmars-d" <digitalmars-d@puremagic.com> wrote:
>
> On 5 September 2015 at 14:14, Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d <digitalmars-d@puremagic.com> wrote:
> > On 9/4/2015 7:52 AM, Manu via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> >>
> >> [...]
> >
> >
> > Sadly, your newsgroup software is back to doing double posts - once in plaintext, once in html.
>
> My software in this case was the mail client on Android.
> I'm astonished this isn't a rampant problem; mail clients seem to do
> this by default. I have not configured it in any special way, not
> changed a single setting... this is default settings for the worlds
> most popular mail client (gmail).
> How can I possibly be the only offender here?

That is a good question (this is a reply from Android Gmail).

On 9/5/2015 1:00 AM, Iain Buclaw via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On 5 Sep 2015 6:31 am, "Manu via Digitalmars-d" <digitalmars-d@puremagic.com
> <mailto:digitalmars-d@puremagic.com>> wrote:
>  >
>  > On 5 September 2015 at 14:14, Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d
>  > <digitalmars-d@puremagic.com <mailto:digitalmars-d@puremagic.com>> wrote:
>  > > On 9/4/2015 7:52 AM, Manu via Digitalmars-d wrote:
>  > >>
>  > >> [...]
>  > >
>  > >
>  > > Sadly, your newsgroup software is back to doing double posts - once in
>  > > plaintext, once in html.
>  >
>  > My software in this case was the mail client on Android.
>  > I'm astonished this isn't a rampant problem; mail clients seem to do
>  > this by default. I have not configured it in any special way, not
>  > changed a single setting... this is default settings for the worlds
>  > most popular mail client (gmail).
>  > How can I possibly be the only offender here?
>
> That is a good question (this is a reply from Android Gmail).


And your post did it too.

If you're using the Thunderbird news reader, typing Cntl-U will show the full source of the message.

On 18-Aug-2015 13:45, Walter Bright wrote:
> Martin ran some benchmarks recently that showed that ddmd compiled with
> dmd was about 30% slower than when compiled with gdc/ldc. This seems to
> be fairly typical.
>
> I'm interested in ways to reduce that gap.

..

> 2. instruction selection patterns like should one generate:
>
>      SETC AL
>      MOVZ EAX,AL
>
> or:
>      SBB EAX
>      NEG EAX
>

See section "Problematic instructions" here:
http://www.agner.org/optimize/optimizing_assembly.pdf

And some invaluable material on each CPU specifics for all x86 from Pentium to Haswell and AMD from K6 toBuldozer:

http://www.agner.org/optimize/microarchitecture.pdf

Hope this helps.

-- 
Dmitry Olshansky

On Saturday, 5 September 2015 at 08:15:06 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
> And your post did it too.
>
> If you're using the Thunderbird news reader, typing Cntl-U will show the full source of the message.

This is perfectly normal for emails and such. They are multipart/alternative MIME messages which pack different versions of the same message together and your client picks its preferred one to show you.

It is kinda useless because the html version adds zero value, but the text version is still there to so your client should just ignore it.

On Friday, 4 September 2015 at 14:25:11 UTC, rsw0x wrote:
> I believe the FOSS version of Intellij can install the Javascript plugin which also adds support for Typescript.
> May be wrong.

Hm. I bought WebStorm to do Dart, but have kinda put Dart on hold, so maybe not a bad idea. I assume it would then work with PyCharm CE.

On Friday, 4 September 2015 at 14:44:46 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
> I heard the TypeScript support for Visual Studio Code is really good.

I'm crossing my fingers for an OS-X or Linux version of VS. ;)

On 9/5/2015 5:54 AM, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
> On Saturday, 5 September 2015 at 08:15:06 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
>> And your post did it too.
>>
>> If you're using the Thunderbird news reader, typing Cntl-U will show the full
>> source of the message.
>
> This is perfectly normal for emails and such. They are multipart/alternative
> MIME messages which pack different versions of the same message together and
> your client picks its preferred one to show you.
>
> It is kinda useless because the html version adds zero value, but the text
> version is still there to so your client should just ignore it.

I know, and my client does, but given the size of the n.g. message database, doubling its size for no added value makes it slower.