We are forking D (page 5)

Settings

Help

Index » General » We are forking D (page 5)

January 04

Re: We are forking D

Posted by i_meva
in reply to GrimMaple

Permalink

i_meva

Posted in reply to GrimMaple

Permalink

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

One of the ways to achive our goal is to have core focuses of the language. Such focuses are:

[...]

If the codes we write in the current D language will work smoothly with this fork, I would like to contribute to this project. A D language that does not have any breakdowns is very important for stability.

January 04

Re: We are forking D

Posted by Abdulhaq
in reply to GrimMaple

Permalink

Abdulhaq

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.

I think this is a good way for Adam and co. to blow off some steam and push forward with the changes they would like to see. I wish them all well on that. They should achieve their goal of evolving their preferred flavour of D faster than it would otherwise happen.

Other potential goals such as becoming a popular and well used dialect of D will be much harder to achieve. A lot of people currently put in a lot of effort on the project admin side, such as web sites, source code management, funding, organising conferences, dealing with commercial customers etc. A handful of gearheads will not want to be spending their weekends and evenings doing that.

This time next year Adam will have a new understanding of why things are as they are.

If this "fork" could be under the umbrella of the main D project, as an experimental D, then I think it has more chance of influencing D and getting the changes into the mainline.

Right now in Discord there is talk of changes to ranges, dub, iterators etc. Significant changes in those areas would take months/years and likely isolate "OpenD" and break many of the libraries in existence. It would make the chances of adoption very small and the community would likely remain small and cut off from the main stream.

Just my two cents.

January 04

Re: We are forking D

Posted by Hors
in reply to i_meva

Permalink

Hors

Posted in reply to i_meva

Permalink

On Thursday, 4 January 2024 at 10:09:27 UTC, i_meva wrote:

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

One of the ways to achive our goal is to have core focuses of the language. Such focuses are:

[...]

D code using nogc and betterC may not work.

January 04

Re: We are forking D

Posted by Martyn
in reply to i_meva

Permalink

Martyn

Posted in reply to i_meva

Permalink

On Thursday, 4 January 2024 at 10:09:27 UTC, i_meva wrote:

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

One of the ways to achive our goal is to have core focuses of the language. Such focuses are:

[...]

It depends, I guess, on how you wrote you program/lib.

While things can change.. this is their roadmap. Currently titled:
"Stuff i might do in my D fork"

This is their "No" category:

Focus on betterC or nogc. I might or might not deliberately break them, but I certainly won't expend effort maintaining or promoting them

So if you write anything for betterC or nogc, you might not be able to migrate to "OpenD"

As I say - its early days yet, and this roadmap could be changed.

January 04

Re: We are forking D

Posted by IGotD-
in reply to Abdulhaq

Permalink

IGotD-

Posted in reply to Abdulhaq

Permalink

On Thursday, 4 January 2024 at 12:51:31 UTC, Abdulhaq wrote:

If this "fork" could be under the umbrella of the main D project, as an experimental D, then I think it has more chance of influencing D and getting the changes into the mainline.

This is very much likely to happen. Walter is a notorious no sayer (a bit too much in my opinion) and rejects ideas that aren't his own or he doesn't fully understand the benefits for the moment. If he gets to play around with new features we will probably discover "this is great" and merge them back into D.

Also there will be a lot of, "OpenD has this feature now and it works great" from other people in the forum. There will be a lot of pressure towards D from others in that regard.

That is what I hope at least, that the new D form will be the tip of the spear.

January 04

Re: We are forking D

Posted by Etienne
in reply to GrimMaple

Permalink

Etienne

Posted in reply to GrimMaple

Permalink

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

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.

The GC would be more efficient if it was instantiated as thread-local for new allocations and globally shared for new shared allocations.

January 05

Re: We are forking D

Posted by Dibyendu Majumdar
in reply to GrimMaple

Permalink

Dibyendu Majumdar

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.

The chances of a fork being successful when the main repo is alive and rapidly changing is close to zero, I am afraid.

January 05

Re: We are forking D

Posted by matheus
in reply to Dibyendu Majumdar

Permalink

matheus

Posted in reply to Dibyendu Majumdar

Permalink

On Friday, 5 January 2024 at 17:02:12 UTC, Dibyendu Majumdar wrote:
> 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.
>>
>
> The chances of a fork being successful when the main repo is alive and rapidly changing is close to zero, I am afraid.

You have a point, but also I wonder what will happen if things like:

DIP1015, DIP1028 and DIP1036 which is currently being discussed in "opend", or other things which usually take years get some traction.

And about other fellows coming back (Maybe?) like Jonathan Marler and others which was already discussed before.

Matheus.

January 05

Re: We are forking D

Posted by H. S. Teoh
in reply to matheus

Permalink

H. S. Teoh

Posted in reply to matheus

Permalink

On Fri, Jan 05, 2024 at 06:55:15PM +0000, matheus via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On Friday, 5 January 2024 at 17:02:12 UTC, Dibyendu Majumdar wrote:
> > 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.
> > > 
> > 
> > The chances of a fork being successful when the main repo is alive and rapidly changing is close to zero, I am afraid.
> 
> You have a point, but also I wonder what will happen if things like:
> 
> DIP1015, DIP1028 and DIP1036 which is currently being discussed in "opend", or other things which usually take years get some traction.

DIP1036 is already merged and working. E.g., the following works today:

----------snip----------
import std;

void main() {
	int i = 10;
	string abc = "hooray";
	float j = 1.5;

	writeln(i"i=$(i) abc=$(abc) j=$(j)");
}
----------snip----------

Output:
----------snip----------
i=10 abc=hooray j=1.5
----------snip----------


> And about other fellows coming back (Maybe?) like Jonathan Marler and others which was already discussed before.
[...]

There's been a lot more than just 2 people actively involved in discussions on the github discussions page, probably even more on discord.  It's anybody's guess what will happen in the future, but at present it seems like this is bigger than it might first appear.


T

-- 
Perhaps the most widespread illusion is that if we were in power we would behave very differently from those who now hold it---when, in truth, in order to get power we would have to become very much like them. -- Unknown

January 06

Re: We are forking D

Posted by Bastiaan Veelo
in reply to GrimMaple

Permalink

Bastiaan Veelo

Posted in reply to GrimMaple

Permalink

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

Growing greatly dissatisfied with how things are in the D Programming Language, we decided it is time to fork it.

We want the process of contribution to be as open-ended as possible, and not having unnecessary blockage to contributions.

https://dpldocs.info/opend/contribute.html

But why name it "OpenD"? If I read "Open" in any project name, I think of "Open Source", not "open-ended". I find it very unfortunate that this may signal that D is somehow not open source, a misconception that we were struggling with for a long time. D being open source is the very reason why a fork is possible in the first place.

Forking is a lot better than just leaving, and I wish you, Adam, and any future contributors success and happiness. I have appreciation for the work that you (especially Adam) have put into D thus far, and I am sure you appreciate the work that everybody else has put into D as well (because why otherwise fork it). Naming it OpenD doesn't look like a nice move to me, and I hope you'll find a better name.

-- Bastiaan.

Top | Forum index | About this forum

Forums