We are forking D (page 2)

Thank you everyone for your genuine interest in this project!

To answer a few questions:

On Tuesday, 2 January 2024 at 18:54:17 UTC, IGotD- wrote:

That's good news but who are "we" in this case?

We -- the community. An idea of a fork was in the air for a long time, it just so happened that Adam beat me to it by an inch. I joined soon after :) There are 2 dedicated members as of now: Adam and I. We're gonna directly ask some of the D people around later on.

Also is there a new forum that we can use in order to discuss things? I'm talking about a forum and not a chat group.

Setting up a forum is too much work™, so we're gonna have to stick with Discord as of now. Maybe a forum will arise later.

As for the name, I don't think it's really important. At least as of now.

January 02

Re: We are forking D

Posted by Luna
in reply to GrimMaple

Permalink

Luna

Posted in reply to GrimMaple

Permalink

On Tuesday, 2 January 2024 at 17:55:56 UTC, GrimMaple wrote:

Hello everyone!

Growing greatly dissatisfied with how things are in the D Programming Language, we decided it is time to fork it.
We want to change the way decisions are made, giving both more freedom to change, and more speed to decision making. We want the process of contribution to be as open-ended as possible, and not having unnecessary blockage to contributions. We also want the language to allow for faster software development. The way this is going to be achieved is still not finalized, but that is the goal.
One of the ways to achive our goal is to have core focuses of the language. Such focuses are:

Embracing the GC and improving upon it, disregarding betterC and nogc in the process
Concentrating on the code being @safe by default
Revizing & rewriting the standard library, making std.v2
Improving druntime and porting it to other platforms, like wasm
Encouraging writing code in D, not sticking up with C
Improving toolchain

The following stuff will be forked:

dmd
ldc
phobos
druntime

As hard as it is to say this, unfortunate code breaking changese are going to be made. But only if they help achieve the goals listed above.

The forking process is still in progress, and there isn't much done per se. We are discussing the future of the fork and what we want from it, it might be a little crazy at first. But if you wish to help out, bring your changes in, or just look around, please join our Discord server to discuss: https://discord.gg/tfT9MjA69u . Temporary website: https://dpldocs.info/opend/contribute.html

Thank you, and good luck.

For the love of everything good, if you want to fork D, please don't name it D, that could create another wave of issues where people think OpenD is actual D and getting confused.

It's fair that you're unhappy with the state of the D language, but I don't think creating confusion is a good solution.

On Tue, Jan 02, 2024 at 08:40:45PM +0000, GrimMaple via Digitalmars-d wrote: > On Tuesday, 2 January 2024 at 20:35:49 UTC, IGotD- wrote: > > On Tuesday, 2 January 2024 at 20:25:17 UTC, GrimMaple wrote: > > > > > > Setting up a forum is too much work™, so we're gonna have to stick with Discord as of now. Maybe a forum will arise later. > > > > > > > Actually no. I was thinking until we have a more permanent forum. One way is to setup something at freeforums.net or similar forum host. > > Enabled discussions on github, if that helps: https://github.com/orgs/opendlang/discussions > > They can be used as a forum. Cool, thanks! That would be a good place to start, even if temporary. T -- Famous last words: I *think* this will work...

On Tue, Jan 02, 2024 at 08:54:49PM +0000, Luna via Digitalmars-d wrote: [...] > For the love of everything good, if you want to fork D, please don't *name* it D, that could create another wave of issues where people think OpenD is *actual* D and getting confused. [...] I propose Boulder. Or boulDer. ;-) I'm more hoping that this drastic action would force things to change for the better, rather than that this would become an actual, hard fork. Boulder, the thing that forces things to get rolling again. :-D The thing that makes D r0x^WI mean, boulder again. :-P T -- "Holy war is an oxymoron." -- Lazarus Long

On Tuesday, 2 January 2024 at 21:16:44 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote: > On Tue, Jan 02, 2024 at 08:54:49PM +0000, Luna via Digitalmars-d wrote: [...] >> For the love of everything good, if you want to fork D, please don't *name* it D, that could create another wave of issues where people think OpenD is *actual* D and getting confused. > [...] > > I propose Boulder. Or boulDer. ;-) > > I'm more hoping that this drastic action would force things to change for the better, rather than that this would become an actual, hard fork. Boulder, the thing that forces things to get rolling again. :-D The thing that makes D r0x^WI mean, boulder again. :-P > > > T You only need one single feature to succeed. AST macros, it can greatly accelerate innovation as not every contributer needs to be a compiler dev. It could also help evaluating experimental GC features.

Forums