On 11/12/2019 11:05 AM, Doc Andrew wrote:
> Still, I think it's kind of neat that you can prove that kind of behavior at compile-time, no run-time checks or unit-tests required!

It is neat indeed.

On Monday, 4 November 2019 at 09:03:04 UTC, RazvanN wrote:
> Good news, everyone!
>
> D has entered the Tiobe top 20 ranking of programming languages [1], landing on the 18th position. I have been keeping an eye on this index, and it is for the first time that I see this happening.
>
> Cheers,
> RazvanN
>
> [1] https://www.tiobe.com/tiobe-index/

It seems that D continues its ascending [1], while rust has seen a fall in popularity (last month it was ranked 25th, while now it is the 31st).

[1] https://www.tiobe.com/tiobe-index/

On Monday, 9 December 2019 at 11:01:24 UTC, RazvanN wrote:
> It seems that D continues its ascending [1], while rust has seen a fall in popularity (last month it was ranked 25th, while now it is the 31st).
>
> [1] https://www.tiobe.com/tiobe-index/

Expect more changes as Google is supposed to be introducing more capable bots at the end of 2019.

On Monday, 9 December 2019 at 11:01:24 UTC, RazvanN wrote:
> It seems that D continues its ascending [1], while rust has seen a fall in popularity (last month it was ranked 25th, while now it is the 31st).
>
> [1] https://www.tiobe.com/tiobe-index/

The exact placement of Rust in the list doesn't say much. This group of languages has such a low signal to noise ratio that ordering them is arguably impossible from the available information.

I am surprised that D didn't fall back down again, though.

On Monday, 9 December 2019 at 14:42:32 UTC, Gregor Mückl wrote:
> I am surprised that D didn't fall back down again, though.

TIOBE is silly. It matches "d) programming" as in "a) swimming b) running c) eating d) programming".

It changes when Google's ranking engine changes. And Google is pruning down quite heavily to get more diverse search results... So, heavily biased. Worse than noise.

On Monday, 9 December 2019 at 15:03:07 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote:
> On Monday, 9 December 2019 at 14:42:32 UTC, Gregor Mückl wrote:
>> I am surprised that D didn't fall back down again, though.
>
> TIOBE is silly. It matches "d) programming" as in "a) swimming b) running c) eating d) programming".
>
> It changes when Google's ranking engine changes. And Google is pruning down quite heavily to get more diverse search results... So, heavily biased. Worse than noise.

Silly as it might be, that is one of the references many MBAs across the enterprise world use when deciding if adopting technology X is worthwhile doing.

The other one being the technology radars produced by consulting companies that are just as silly.

On Monday, 9 December 2019 at 15:18:46 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:
> The other one being the technology radars produced by consulting companies that are just as silly.

Well, that makes it easy to figure out who to avoid. Considering TypeScript is listed at position 40 and Assembly is listed at position 14.

On Monday, 9 December 2019 at 16:50:28 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote:
> On Monday, 9 December 2019 at 15:18:46 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:
>> The other one being the technology radars produced by consulting companies that are just as silly.
>
> Well, that makes it easy to figure out who to avoid. Considering TypeScript is listed at position 40 and Assembly is listed at position 14.

(TypeScript was at position 37, sry)

I assume the reason is (in addition to Google bias) that people don't write "TypeScript programming language".

Assembly probably rank high because people write things like "Assembly programming was popular in the 1980s".

Sigh...

On Monday, 9 December 2019 at 15:18:46 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:
> On Monday, 9 December 2019 at 15:03:07 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote:
>> On Monday, 9 December 2019 at 14:42:32 UTC, Gregor Mückl wrote:
>>> I am surprised that D didn't fall back down again, though.
>>
>> TIOBE is silly. It matches "d) programming" as in "a) swimming b) running c) eating d) programming".
>>
>> It changes when Google's ranking engine changes. And Google is pruning down quite heavily to get more diverse search results... So, heavily biased. Worse than noise.
>
> Silly as it might be, that is one of the references many MBAs across the enterprise world use when deciding if adopting technology X is worthwhile doing.
>
> The other one being the technology radars produced by consulting companies that are just as silly.

o God ... really

:-O

On Monday, 9 December 2019 at 15:18:46 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:
> On Monday, 9 December 2019 at 15:03:07 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote:
>> On Monday, 9 December 2019 at 14:42:32 UTC, Gregor Mückl wrote:
>>> I am surprised that D didn't fall back down again, though.
>>
>> TIOBE is silly. It matches "d) programming" as in "a) swimming b) running c) eating d) programming".
>>
>> It changes when Google's ranking engine changes. And Google is pruning down quite heavily to get more diverse search results... So, heavily biased. Worse than noise.
>
> Silly as it might be, that is one of the references many MBAs across the enterprise world use when deciding if adopting technology X is worthwhile doing.
>
> The other one being the technology radars produced by consulting companies that are just as silly.

I think this is an important point.

Here you may see the change over time of Tiobes percent value:

https://www.tiobe.com/tiobe-index/d/

Any comment on this curve?
Is it possible to match certain events to this shape?