On 2015-10-16 12:27, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:

> The areas I consider incomplete:
>
> * Language definition, e.g. "shared".
> * Language definition _writeup_, we need to be a lot more precise than
> we currently are.
> * Process for introducing new features, i.e. right now we seem to have
> some of the drawbacks of a large political organization and also the
> drawbacks of a small community.
> * Parts of stdlib, e.g. no robust idioms for transferring complex
> objects across threads, unneeded use of the GC, insufficient support for
> safe garbage collection; also no extensive containers, file formats,
> etc. etc.
> * Tutorials - there's no simple tutorial material that takes people from
> novice to initiated status.

The module system? Perhaps not incomplete, but the wholes need to be plugged. Issue 313, 314 and all the issues that lately come up with local imports.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg

On Friday, 16 October 2015 at 10:25:07 UTC, Chris wrote:
> Apart from that, I think the fact that D is still not fit for mobile platforms is a huge drawback. Loads of people want apps, loads of people have some sort of smart phone, tablet or whatever. Sometimes I think that we're getting sucked in by the quick sand of language specs, pointers, GC etc. while important issues like targeting mobile platforms are second class citizens. Nim for example targeted mobile platforms right from the start. So did Go. I cannot recommend D wholeheartedly unless it also works on ARM at the click of a button. Please correct me if I'm wrong here, but mobile is not yet 100%.

Ldc binaries for iOS were announced in July, Dan's now working on 64-bit support:

http://forum.dlang.org/thread/m2mvz57seb.fsf@comcast.net

Android is pretty much done, just cleaning it up by integrating with ldc's CMake build system and other small details, announcement coming next week.

On 10/17/15 5:37 PM, Joakim wrote:
> On Friday, 16 October 2015 at 10:25:07 UTC, Chris wrote:
>> Apart from that, I think the fact that D is still not fit for mobile
>> platforms is a huge drawback. Loads of people want apps, loads of
>> people have some sort of smart phone, tablet or whatever. Sometimes I
>> think that we're getting sucked in by the quick sand of language
>> specs, pointers, GC etc. while important issues like targeting mobile
>> platforms are second class citizens. Nim for example targeted mobile
>> platforms right from the start. So did Go. I cannot recommend D
>> wholeheartedly unless it also works on ARM at the click of a button.
>> Please correct me if I'm wrong here, but mobile is not yet 100%.
>
> Ldc binaries for iOS were announced in July, Dan's now working on 64-bit
> support:
>
> http://forum.dlang.org/thread/m2mvz57seb.fsf@comcast.net
>
> Android is pretty much done, just cleaning it up by integrating with
> ldc's CMake build system and other small details, announcement coming
> next week.

Fantastic!

Could you please send a PR to upgrade http://dlang.org/download.html so it lists the iOS and (later) Android downloads? Even I didn't know ldc has an iOS download! -- Andrei

On Saturday, 17 October 2015 at 14:37:46 UTC, Joakim wrote:
> On Friday, 16 October 2015 at 10:25:07 UTC, Chris wrote:
>> Apart from that, I think the fact that D is still not fit for mobile platforms is a huge drawback. Loads of people want apps, loads of people have some sort of smart phone, tablet or whatever. Sometimes I think that we're getting sucked in by the quick sand of language specs, pointers, GC etc. while important issues like targeting mobile platforms are second class citizens. Nim for example targeted mobile platforms right from the start. So did Go. I cannot recommend D wholeheartedly unless it also works on ARM at the click of a button. Please correct me if I'm wrong here, but mobile is not yet 100%.
>
> Ldc binaries for iOS were announced in July, Dan's now working on 64-bit support:
>
> http://forum.dlang.org/thread/m2mvz57seb.fsf@comcast.net
>
> Android is pretty much done, just cleaning it up by integrating with ldc's CMake build system and other small details, announcement coming next week.

Yeah, I remember the announcemment, I was very happy. Is it still 2.066 or is it part and parcel of the latest LDC? Your efforts are very much appreciated! Thank you guys!

On Saturday, 17 October 2015 at 16:38:29 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> Fantastic!
>
> Could you please send a PR to upgrade http://dlang.org/download.html so it lists the iOS and (later) Android downloads? Even I didn't know ldc has an iOS download! -- Andrei

Will do.  Support for both platforms is at the alpha stage, but doesn't hurt to get more hands on them, and the fact that pretty much all of the druntime and phobos tests pass mean they're in reasonably good shape.

On Friday, 16 October 2015 at 08:29:18 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
> On Thursday, 15 October 2015 at 09:09:22 UTC, Chris wrote:
>> I agree with logicchains. The impression people have is exactly this. Go = neat and tidy, D = mess.
>
> Do people have the same impression from generic code in Go?

Crutches help them move along: http://blog.golang.org/generate

On 10/17/15 7:55 PM, Joakim wrote:
> On Saturday, 17 October 2015 at 16:38:29 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>> Fantastic!
>>
>> Could you please send a PR to upgrade http://dlang.org/download.html
>> so it lists the iOS and (later) Android downloads? Even I didn't know
>> ldc has an iOS download! -- Andrei
>
> Will do.  Support for both platforms is at the alpha stage, but doesn't
> hurt to get more hands on them, and the fact that pretty much all of the
> druntime and phobos tests pass mean they're in reasonably good shape.

Great - thanks! -- Andrei

On Saturday, 17 October 2015 at 16:55:06 UTC, Joakim wrote:
> On Saturday, 17 October 2015 at 16:38:29 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>> Fantastic!
>>
>> Could you please send a PR to upgrade http://dlang.org/download.html so it lists the iOS and (later) Android downloads? Even I didn't know ldc has an iOS download! -- Andrei
>
> Will do.  Support for both platforms is at the alpha stage, but doesn't hurt to get more hands on them, and the fact that pretty much all of the druntime and phobos tests pass mean they're in reasonably good shape.

I wish the extent of platform support for GDC and LDC was clearer. I decided not to list any platforms on D's download page unless support for those platforms was rock-solid and is expected to work.

At least at that time, iOS and Android support, as I understood it, was in the "well, if you download this thing some guy uploaded to his personal website and patch that file and don't do this thing which doesn't work yet, you might get a "hello world" that runs from the terminal if you SSH in" ballpark. I'm not sure we should be advertising support for any platform at that level. Personally, I feel that if a platform/architecture is listed on a language's download page, I should be able to download the compiler and build a fully-working application within a few minutes, and as I understand we are nowhere close to that yet. I don't feel particularly strong about this, but if we do decide to lower the bar, then we should reconsider all the other platforms that have been left out (such as the long list of GDC architectures which I understood Iain to say that, well, since the build succeeds and Debian successfully packages it, then it has to work. I might be wrong, though, which is my point exactly - there is really insufficient information about what exactly one can expect to work on each platform/architecture (and their combinations).

On 10/17/2015 2:03 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> On 10/17/15 7:55 PM, Joakim wrote:
>> On Saturday, 17 October 2015 at 16:38:29 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>>> Fantastic!
>>>
>>> Could you please send a PR to upgrade http://dlang.org/download.html
>>> so it lists the iOS and (later) Android downloads? Even I didn't know
>>> ldc has an iOS download! -- Andrei
>>
>> Will do.  Support for both platforms is at the alpha stage, but doesn't
>> hurt to get more hands on them, and the fact that pretty much all of the
>> druntime and phobos tests pass mean they're in reasonably good shape.
>
> Great - thanks! -- Andrei
>

This is all very good news!

On 10/17/2015 2:24 PM, Vladimir Panteleev wrote:
> I wish the extent of platform support for GDC and LDC was clearer. I
> decided not to list any platforms on D's download page unless support
> for those platforms was rock-solid and is expected to work.
>
> At least at that time, iOS and Android support, as I understood it, was
> in the "well, if you download this thing some guy uploaded to his
> personal website and patch that file and don't do this thing which
> doesn't work yet, you might get a "hello world" that runs from the
> terminal if you SSH in" ballpark. I'm not sure we should be advertising
> support for any platform at that level. Personally, I feel that if a
> platform/architecture is listed on a language's download page, I should
> be able to download the compiler and build a fully-working application
> within a few minutes, and as I understand we are nowhere close to that
> yet. I don't feel particularly strong about this, but if we do decide to
> lower the bar, then we should reconsider all the other platforms that
> have been left out (such as the long list of GDC architectures which I
> understood Iain to say that, well, since the build succeeds and Debian
> successfully packages it, then it has to work. I might be wrong, though,
> which is my point exactly - there is really insufficient information
> about what exactly one can expect to work on each platform/architecture
> (and their combinations).

I think it'll be alright if these are clearly marked as unofficial and alpha quality, and perhaps with a blurb with some details on what it's state actually is, like "compiles hello world".