On 03/26/2015 02:00 PM, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
>
> And seriously, the article in question barely mentions D at all.
>

Sorry, what I meant is it doesn't rely on D, and "D > Go" is very clearly NOT the point the article is trying to make. It's just used for contrast, to illustrate the points. It could've been other languages as well.

On 03/26/2015 02:04 PM, "Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQi?= <ola.fosheim.grostad+dlang@gmail.com>" wrote:
> On Thursday, 26 March 2015 at 18:00:29 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
>> So no, this is NOT some sort of "D community piece attacking another
>> language" as some comments seem to imply. It is merely an isolated
>> critique of one language by someone who happens to be *using* the
>> given language.
>
> ==> digitalmars.D.announce

Oh, so you were merely objecting to it being posted on D.announce rather than objecting to the article itself? Nevermind then.

On 03/25/2015 11:11 PM, lobo wrote:
>
> Overall the blog post is a bit immature with little rigor and too much
> emotion.

I can't comment on the accuracy of the comparisons, but FWIW, I'd take "immature and emotional" over "dry, corporate and PC" any day. :) Life's too short to be bland.

On Thursday, 26 March 2015 at 18:07:39 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
> On 03/26/2015 02:04 PM, "Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQi?= <ola.fosheim.grostad+dlang@gmail.com>" wrote:
>> On Thursday, 26 March 2015 at 18:00:29 UTC, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
>>> So no, this is NOT some sort of "D community piece attacking another
>>> language" as some comments seem to imply. It is merely an isolated
>>> critique of one language by someone who happens to be *using* the
>>> given language.
>>
>> ==> digitalmars.D.announce
>
> Oh, so you were merely objecting to it being posted on D.announce rather than objecting to the article itself? Nevermind then.

I was merely pointing out that the D community comes through as desperate. Whether that is objectionable depends on how one wants to be perceived? Maybe it is the truth? In that case it is a good thing that it comes through as desperate!! ;^)

And yes, when it is posted to the announcement list by one of the D language designers it is given a different status than merely being a random rant using toy examples. Obvious ranting is okish if it doesn't pretend to be more than that, but then it isn't something to be announced... is it?

http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/people_who_live_in_glass_houses_shouldn%27t_throw_stones

On 03/26/2015 04:38 AM, Russel Winder via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
>
> I paraphrase the common theme thus:  Go is
> successful in the market, D isn't, therefore Go is a better language
> than D.

I love how Go's very own reasoning there naturally suggests that PHP, C++, and Java must all be vastly superior to Go.

Btw, I have nothing against people complaining about Go's lack of productivity features and pointing out that they have competition from  D. After all, I too did some ranting on the topic back in 2009:

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/golang-nuts/TTCaIpSxn2U%5B1-25%5D

«I think Go has set off onto a very nice track, but it doesn't seem
like you guys have really managed to communicate in which direction
you are heading. I expect Go to improve, but if it isn't going to
provide for more error-catching facilities then it probably isn't
worth the trouble. Go has more competition than C and C++: D comes to
mind along with other smaller competitors.»

Nothing is new under the sun etc...

On Thu, 2015-03-26 at 14:37 -0400, Nick Sabalausky via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
> On 03/26/2015 04:38 AM, Russel Winder via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
> > 
> > I paraphrase the common theme thus:  Go is
> > successful in the market, D isn't, therefore Go is a better
> > language
> > than D.
> 
> I love how Go's very own reasoning there naturally suggests that PHP, C++, and Java must all be vastly superior to Go.

Did I mention sophistry and casuistry?

-- 
Russel. ============================================================================= Dr Russel Winder      t: +44 20 7585 2200   voip: sip:russel.winder@ekiga.net 41 Buckmaster Road    m: +44 7770 465 077   xmpp: russel@winder.org.uk London SW11 1EN, UK   w: www.russel.org.uk  skype: russel_winder

On Thursday, 26 March 2015 at 08:53:31 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote:

> There is a difference between claiming that language A makes this and that difficult and claiming that language B is better than A.

We have different interpretations of the article. My reading was "I hate these properties of Go."

> If you aren't making a research language (and D most certainly would fail in that arena) the only thing that matters is how it fares in a production setting by programmers who do full time programming in the language.

You're making a big assumption about which programmers and projects count and which don't. I wonder if outside of Google if there are even 100 programmers working full time exclusively with Go. I don't work full time with D, but I work with it a lot, and I don't see why my experience shouldn't count.

On 3/26/2015 1:44 AM, Gary Willoughby wrote:
> I know it's a bit unfair in places and it's got a click bait title but who
> cares? I got my point across and I think people understand where i'm coming
> from. It seems to have got really popular and I've been swamped with mail, etc.
> I think it's the most read article i've ever written. ha! :o)

You've managed to get 376 points and 663 comments, which is probably a record for any Reddit D related article!

For better or worse, you've clearly struck a nerve.

On Thursday, 26 March 2015 at 19:16:54 UTC, bachmeier wrote:
> You're making a big assumption about which programmers and projects count and which don't. I wonder if outside of Google

It doesn't matter what the programmers think, what matters is how the development environment affects the project in measurable terms. Having all kinds of features does not necessarily benefit projects. That's the difference between a fun toy language and one aiming for production and maintenance.