On Tuesday, 20 December 2016 at 14:18:38 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
> On Tuesday, 20 December 2016 at 11:17:19 UTC, Guillaume Piolat wrote:
>
>> Michael Parker is working on that from last I heard.
>
> Yes, he is, though slowly. I can give it more priority after the New Year.

Thanks for doing this!

On 12/20/2016 05:53 AM, Dicebot wrote:
> On 12/20/2016 12:48 PM, Benjiro wrote:
>> Actually, i did not vent any anger until this morning when i noticed the
>> wiseass response. All the points i wrote yesterday are items that
>> actually bother a lot more people. But those same people who complain
>> about it, always get shutdown with that typical: Do it yourself response
>> / Improve the standard library / ...
>
> Can you list specific list of actions/events you would have wanted to
> see as a result of your post? Literally "person X does Y".

That would be very helpful. -- Andrei

On Tuesday, 20 December 2016 at 14:18:38 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
> On Tuesday, 20 December 2016 at 11:17:19 UTC, Guillaume Piolat wrote:
>
>> Michael Parker is working on that from last I heard.
>
> Yes, he is, though slowly. I can give it more priority after the New Year.

As I recall, you made your announcement in response to one of my previous complaints, and I'm excited that you are doing it. This is going to be a very important document for D adoption.

On Monday, 19 December 2016 at 23:02:59 UTC, Benjiro wrote:
> I split this from the "Re: A betterC modular standard library?" topic because my response is will be too much off-topic but the whole thread is irking me the wrong way. I see some of the same argument coming up all the time, with a level of frequency.
>
> D has not market:
> -----------------
>
> A lot of times people complain that D has no real audience / market. Is D the perfect system. No... But lets compare to those other languages shall we? Now this is my opinion, so take it with a bit of salt.
>
> Go: Its is a "simple" language. But its forced restrictions at times are so annoying its saps all the fun out of the coding. Its not really C. Its more Basic on steroids. Unfortunately while Go has huge amount of traction and packages ( 70k from my count ), the quality is also... It has a few real gems those gems are a result of the mass amount of packages. It has its own market. A scripting replacement market mostly.
>
> Crystal: Is pure Ruby focused. Again, it draws in a lot of people with a Ruby background. Interesting language that is already splitting away from Ruby comparability.
>
> Nim/Julia/Numpy/Numba: Are very Python like focused. Nim will disagree but its very clear. Again, the focus seems to draw in more scripting language orientated people, mostly from the Python area.
>
> Rust: Promotes itself to be better C but its simply a more complex language design. A over active amount of fans, that do not understand its complex. Less fun to get into. Reminds me too much of Perl.
>
> D is C++ but improved/simplified. Its not to hard to get into, its more easy for anybody from a C background.
>
> Take it from a guy that spend a large part of his life in PHP. I feel more at home with D, then with all the other languages. The moment you get over a few hurdles, it becomes a very easy language. My point is that D does fit in a specific market. It fits in between C++ and scripting languages like PHP ( that has a more C background ).
>
> Its not going to convert a lot of C++ people. Sorry but its true. C++ has been evolving, the people who invested into C++ have very little advantage of going to D. The whole focus on C++ people marketing is simply wrong! Every time this gets mentioned in external forums, the language gets a pounding by people with the same argumentation. Why go for D when C++ 20xx version does it also.
>
> Trusting a person with C like scripting language ( like PHP/Java ) background into C++, well that is fun <sarcasm>. People always seem to say that D has no real advantage but it has. Its easier C++ for people who do not come from C/C++. Maybe i am downplaying this but for love of the gods, the focus is wrong. I am the same guy that complained a while ago about the website its examples being too "advanced" and it scares a big potential group of people away.
>
> Community:
> ----------
>
> But community wise there is a real issue. People are friendly and help out. But it feels like everybody is doing there own thing.
>
> I see a lot of people arguing a lot about D and sorry to say but at times it sounds like a kindergarten. Walter/Andrei are right that updates and changes need to be focused on the standard library. Maybe its because people who use D are more into proprietary software, that there is less community response with work going into the library. But ... see below in Walter / Andrei section.
>
> Library ( and runtime bloat ):
> ------------------------------
>
> But it also does not diminish some of the requests. When i write a simple program that uses the socket, standard, string and conv library. All it does is open a TCP socket and send a response back. This is not supposed to take 2.4MB in memory, with a 1.2MB compiled executable ( 450kb o file ). Full blown Nginx uses only one MB more for its core in memory. For something so simple, its a little bit crazy.
>
> When i make a plugin in Go 1.8, it uses 10KB. A plugin ( shared C library ) in D uses almost 200KB. Using C++ it results into another 10KB file. Maybe i am a total noob but some things make no sense. It gives me the impression that some massive run times are getting added or there is some major library bloat.
>
> Library Standardization:
> ------------------------
>
> Some of the proposals sounds very correct. The library needs to be split. Every module needs its own GIT. People need to be able to add standard modules ( after approval ).
>
> No offense but where is the standard database library for D? There is none. That is just a load of bull. Anybody who wants to program in any language expect the language to have a standard database library! Not that you need to search the packages for a standard library. I have seen one man projects that have more standard library support then D.
>
> Its one of the most basic packages. How about a simple web server? A lot of languages offer this by default. It gets people going. vibe.d is not a simple web server. It's not a standard package.
>
> If you are a low level programmer, sure, you can write you way around it. Despite my PHP handicap i am writing a Sqlite wrapper for my work. I do not use 3th party packages because a) i do not know the code b) the fear that the work will be abandoned. I can excuse (a), when i know its the standard library because there will always be people willing to work on  the standard library.
>
> Documentation:
> --------------
>
> I do not use it. Its such a mess to read with long paragraphs and a LOT of stuff not even documented. Like the whole C wrappers etc. My personal bible is simple: Google search for examples and Ali's book for some rare cases.
>
> When i compare this to my PHP background. Hmmmm, what does x function do again. Google function. Webpage with X function. Links to related function. Examples. Clear simple answers.
>
> This automated documentation generation is the same **** i see in other "new" languages. Impersonal is the word to describe it. Sure there is some tutorial in the documentation that way too long ( never hear of chapters? ) but a lot of that information needs to be with the functions.
>
> Maybe other developers can make more heads or tails out of the API documentation but like i said, i do not use it. Every time i need a advanced feature its hardly documented. With references and text buildups that is just annoying.
>
> Editor support:
> ---------------
>
> What a struggle. Visual Studio C is probably the editor with the best 3th party support.
>
> IntelliJ: Hardly any plugins. Limited to IntelliJ platform and not the rest.
> Atom: Same issue, hardly any advanced D support.
> Vim: Lets not go there.
> 3Th party D IDE's: A lot simply are designed for local working, white background ( uch ), etc...
>
> I can go on. For me it has been a struggle to find the perfect editor. Extended IDE's like IntelliJ have hardly support. There are a lot of plugins to add D to editors but most are long time dead or incomplete.
>
> Try remote editing D and see how much fun it is. Most Editors or IDE with proper remote edit ability, have lacking D supported plugins.
>
> Too many need 3th party to do something that D needs to support from itself:
>
> dcd - Used for auto completion
> dfmt - Used for code formatting
> dscanner - Used for static code linting
> ...
>
> This needs to be in the default installation of dmd! It makes no sense that these are not included.
>
>
> Future:
> --------
>
> You want D to have traction. Marketing, more library support, less focus on adding even more advanced features, fixing issues ( like better GC ), CTFE ( Stefan is dealing with that ), Documentation, better Editor support...
>
> Walter / Andrei:
> ----------------
>
> No offense guys, just something that i see in a lot of posts. The hinting at people to add more to the standard libraries. That little push. But frankly, its annoying when nothing gets done.
>
> People complain about x feature. You tell people to add to the standard library or bring the project in. But anybody who has ever read this forum sees how adding things to the language is LONG process and a lot of times idea's get shot down very fast.
>
> For the standard library there is no process as far as i can tell. Experimental at best, where code seems to have a nice long death.
>
> Just needed to get this off my chest. The problems with D are LONG TIME known. Anybody who spends some time reading the forums sees the exact same things.
>
> My advice Walter / Andrei: Stop trying to add new things to the code. It works. Its not going anywhere. There are no features that you can add, that people can not already do. Maybe it takes a few longer lines but those are not the issues.
>
> Focus on improving the other issues like stated above. Maybe also deal with some of the speed  bloat issues. If you ask people to help, give them the motivation to do so.
>
> Bring more projects into D. When you have people like Webfreak making workspace-d, to simply the installation of those almost required editor extensions, it tells you that D has a issue.
>
>
> Ilya's proposals are too extreme and need a middle ground. But he is not wrong.
>
> Seb posted a massive list of modules that can be standard candidates. And the response is more or less ignore it. People who work on Standard libraries are more motivated. Bring  them into the fold. But it seems that they simple get ignored.
>
> Like i said, please work on standard libraries is not the answer. It does not motivate people ( especially when in the same text you end up breaking down people there proposals ). Maybe its not the intention but it comes over like this.
>
> Why is there no forum part for proposals about libraries that get added to Phobos ( why is it even still called that. Call it standard library and be done with it. It only confuses new people ). The current forum is a pure spam forum.
>
> You need a Standard forum. With subbranches for std.xxx, std.xxx, std... Let people talk about improvements there. If people want to add a new branch, let them put up a proposal and do NOT mothball it for months in discussions.
>
> Hell, the whole "D Programming Language - Development" forum is so much spam, it becomes almost useless. Its a distraction to post each issue there with 0 responses on 95%.
>
> End Rant:
> ---------
>
> Sorry for the long text but as somebody who has been reading the forums for a while now, its just annoying to see some of the bickering.
>
> But i simply get frustrated seeing the direction where relative simple things get overlooked for more complex features! D already is a great language but it REALLY has issue on several departments. It does not need more boilerplate / expansion, it needs focus! Most of the points that i bring up are not that complex. But it takes a community manager / moderator to keep topics a bit more focused. Not somebody who will go into endless discussions with people ( not naming names ... Andrei ;) ). Sorry guys but it feels like you are too technical focused and not thinking about the bigger picture. Suggesting things does not work when nobody gives people the chance to prove themselves.
>
> Give people the ability to add more to std.experimental. Give it its own forum part. Give people actual hope that there work can be added. I have seen several ex-D programmers, who complained about D regarding issues like this. If D wants to be a community project, then act like a community project. Because now, its just a contribution project where some people have easier access to add stuff and other walk against a brick wall of months ( and give up ).
>
> Its late... already spend almost two hours writing this, that i was able to spend on writing actual code. And i am going to take a break from reading this forum, it sucks the life out of people and they spending all the time on bickering over details and eventually not getting a darn thing done. Already overworked at work + my own D project.

Rust doesn't promote itself as a better C. It promotes itself as a replacement for C/C++ which is not the same thing.

On Tuesday, 20 December 2016 at 14:09:45 UTC, Dibyendu Majumdar wrote:
>
> Apologies for being one of those who offers advice but no action.

Don't be Dibyendu ...

We "ranters" are actually D's "client base". There seem to be the wrong impression by the D-Team, that the "clients" are also the people who need to help grow D.

I do not recall seeing on the C++ and other forums this constant attitude from fix it yourselves or put it in the libraries or ... Its mostly on the smaller languages where they lack people. And at the same time, that is a very scary though for companies who want to use a language.

Like you stated, the focus seems to be spread out compared to the needs. Its nice that a lot of the features of D, ended up in the new revisions of C++. But D is not a proving ground for C++ ideas.

At some moment one needs to say slow down with the new language features and focus on the core. Take for example the recent DIP 1005 proposal. Is it really needed now? Can people not work with D without this feature?

If there is one thing that still scares people today, is hearing how D split the community with the D1/D2 version. And yet, even more features seems to be added to the language while the rest seems to be more or less low priority. Lets face it, its not exactly sexy doing boring documentation updates, creating examples, creating more std classes etc. Its way more fun to enhance a language ( its a trap too often seen in new languages. Its almost like language developers are in a arms race, to outdo each other but sometimes as the expensive of other area's ).

Anyway, enough "ranting" for me, back to work.

On Tuesday, 20 December 2016 at 10:46:28 UTC, bachmeier wrote:
> I realized a while back that this community is incapable of understanding what is wrong with Dub's documentation.

Many of the top folks don't use it, but I recall Andre commenting on trying to use it and getting frustrated.

It's better than than it was 6 months ago, but still could be improved.

On Tuesday, 20 December 2016 at 15:17:56 UTC, Benjiro wrote:
> I do not recall seeing on the C++ and other forums this constant attitude from fix it yourselves or put it in the libraries or ... Its mostly on the smaller languages where they lack people. And at the same time, that is a very scary though for companies who want to use a language.

I think it's important to be realistic. One of D's limitations is that it does not have the money of Microsoft or Intel behind it, and it does not have hundreds of billion-dollar corporations depending on it for critical business operations. Volunteer organizations will be run differently from outfits that have large budgets to pay people to do the ugly work. This is not an excuse, it is simply the current state of affairs.

On 12/20/2016 05:17 PM, Benjiro wrote:
> On Tuesday, 20 December 2016 at 14:09:45 UTC, Dibyendu Majumdar wrote:
>>
>> Apologies for being one of those who offers advice but no action.
> 
> Don't be Dibyendu ...
> 
> We "ranters" are actually D's "client base". There seem to be the wrong impression by the D-Team, that the "clients" are also the people who need to help grow D.

Just how much exactly are paying to D Foundation for support to call yourself a client? What are your support contract terms?

> I do not recall seeing on the C++ and other forums this constant
> attitude from fix it yourselves or put it in the libraries or ... Its
> mostly on the smaller languages where they lack people. And at the same
> time, that is a very scary though for companies who want to use a language.

Yes, D is small language with no developers and no funds and C++ is huge one with enormous corporate involvement, enough to afford big crowd of free riders. Your point?

> Anyway, enough "ranting" for me, back to work.

I am really tired of this recurring bullshit of random guys coming up and acting as if they have any right to demand anything. You distract those few that are willing to do the work from focusing on it, you are not capable of saying anything not widely known and you have no desire to contribute yourself.

My opinion? Fuck off.

On Tuesday, 20 December 2016 at 11:52:05 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:

> If you don't want to fix anything, ok. But you can still file bugzilla issues for things that you find.

This is a valid point. I just did that for some std.datetime functions that need improved documentation.

On 12/20/2016 7:17 AM, Benjiro wrote:
> I do not recall seeing on the C++ and other forums this constant attitude from
> fix it yourselves or put it in the libraries or ...

Oh, it's certainly there. If you want to change C++ or the C++ Standard Library, you are told to submit a proposal paper to the C++ Committee, which is a quite formal and arduous process and takes years.

There is no such thing as posting a complaint on comp.lang.c++ and legions of people jump in to take care of it for you.

D is quite a bit less formal, but still, if you want action consider that you aren't going to get it with any organization unless you're willing to:

1. pay others to do it

2. convince others that your important issues are more important than everyone else's important issues that they are already working on

3. put some effort into it yourself

This includes C, C++, Java, Go, Rust, basically every language in existence.

---

Note that pretty much every day in the D forums, people post lists of their most important issues they want other people to work on. And the lists are always different.

When people invest time into solving the problems they complain about, that's evidence that those issues are more important. It's the same in C++ land - a common sentiment among the C++ stars is that if someone isn't willing to make an effort to write a proposal to the C++ Committee, it isn't an issue worth their time, either.

It really can't be any other way.