January 15, 2007
Thank you. It's good to see that not everyone gets overly defensive in the face of constructive criticism these days (having just come from a long day full of this!). :)
January 15, 2007
Er... sounds like we're pouncing on you pretty hard despite what you did to fix this: it just sounded very reluctant.

Just wanted to say again: thanks for listening.

-JJR
January 15, 2007
Walter Bright wrote:
> But also, now that 1.0 is here, the time for that may have passed. To that end, I've just removed the entries for the non-D languages. People coming to D from those languages already know what they can do, and can form their own conclusions.

I think it's quite nice now. That was a clever choice.
(IMO, in this context, the colors are also fine)

--
Luís Marques
January 15, 2007
Luís Marques wrote:
> Walter Bright wrote:
>> But also, now that 1.0 is here, the time for that may have passed. To that end, I've just removed the entries for the non-D languages. People coming to D from those languages already know what they can do, and can form their own conclusions.
> 
> I think it's quite nice now. That was a clever choice.
> (IMO, in this context, the colors are also fine)
> 
> -- 
> Luís Marques

Actually, I'll add that you might want to tweak the comparison comments. Because only D is listed now, some remarks about other languages seem to appear a bit out of context.

The "Willeam NerdSpeare" remark... well... :)
January 15, 2007
Luís Marques wrote:
> Luís Marques wrote:
>> Walter Bright wrote:
>>> But also, now that 1.0 is here, the time for that may have passed. To that end, I've just removed the entries for the non-D languages. People coming to D from those languages already know what they can do, and can form their own conclusions.
>>
>> I think it's quite nice now. That was a clever choice.
>> (IMO, in this context, the colors are also fine)
>>
>> -- 
>> Luís Marques
> 
> Actually, I'll add that you might want to tweak the comparison comments. Because only D is listed now, some remarks about other languages seem to appear a bit out of context.
> 
> The "Willeam NerdSpeare" remark... well... :)

I'll second your "well..." on that.
And I'll raise you one "uh..." for the "Richard Deyman" quote found on other pages.  :-)   (Seriously I don't think Richard Feynman's quote about quantum mechanics is well-known enough for most people to even recognize that its a fake quote, let alone that it's a joke.)

--bb
January 16, 2007
also, the menu on the left-hand side says, D vs C/C++/C#/Java when you're on the other pages

it is much better. Speaking for the other language is pretty aggressive. I like how it is now.

Bill Baxter wrote:
> Luís Marques wrote:
>> Luís Marques wrote:
>>> Walter Bright wrote:
>>>> But also, now that 1.0 is here, the time for that may have passed. To that end, I've just removed the entries for the non-D languages. People coming to D from those languages already know what they can do, and can form their own conclusions.
>>>
>>> I think it's quite nice now. That was a clever choice.
>>> (IMO, in this context, the colors are also fine)
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> Luís Marques
>>
>> Actually, I'll add that you might want to tweak the comparison comments. Because only D is listed now, some remarks about other languages seem to appear a bit out of context.
>>
>> The "Willeam NerdSpeare" remark... well... :)
> 
> I'll second your "well..." on that.
> And I'll raise you one "uh..." for the "Richard Deyman" quote found on other pages.  :-)   (Seriously I don't think Richard Feynman's quote about quantum mechanics is well-known enough for most people to even recognize that its a fake quote, let alone that it's a joke.)
> 
> --bb
January 16, 2007
Bill Baxter wrote:
> Luís Marques wrote:
>> The "Willeam NerdSpeare" remark... well... :)
> 
> I'll second your "well..." on that.
> And I'll raise you one "uh..." for the "Richard Deyman" quote found on other pages.  :-)   (Seriously I don't think Richard Feynman's quote about quantum mechanics is well-known enough for most people to even recognize that its a fake quote, let alone that it's a joke.)

It is a joke just for nerds <g>.

'You will obey my orders!' -- James "D" Quark

January 16, 2007
Walter Bright wrote:
> I don't agree at all that the table is misleading, deceptive, dishonest, etc. It says right up front what it is - a comparison of *core* language features. You can do anything in a library in any language.
> 
> I agree, though, that it is out of date with respect to the latest releases of C# and Java.
> 
> I also agree that the table is meant to draw attention, with the brightly colored boxes, etc. Being a little confrontational helps get discussions going. And yes, it throws down the gauntlet and is in your face.
> 
> But also, now that 1.0 is here, the time for that may have passed. To that end, I've just removed the entries for the non-D languages. People coming to D from those languages already know what they can do, and can form their own conclusions.

I think that's a wise decision. I've always hated that table.

Andrei
January 17, 2007
I'm kind of glad its not going away completely, because I've always found the links on column #0 provide a neat resource for finding things like "static if" when you don't remember the syntax (or keyword!) that makes it tick.

I'm wondering if a larger version like this would be useful:

|String support:
| D                   C                   C++           Java
| UTF8,16,32 types    char*, null         string and    Special class with
| used with D's       terminated          wstring are   language support;
| static + dynamic    arrays with         ASCII and     is an immutable
| arrays.             libc's string.h     UTF16 array   array of UTF16
|                     support functions.  classes.      codepoints.

It could be a mixture of "what exists" plus "how to do it".

But maybe this is beyond the scope of this site for now -- it would take a lot of typing and maybe some research to fill in such a table and that might be better done via wiki.

Kevin
January 17, 2007
Kevin Bealer wrote:

> I'm wondering if a larger version like this would be useful:
> 
> |String support:
> | D                   C                   C++           Java
> | UTF8,16,32 types    char*, null         string and    Special class with
> | used with D's       terminated          wstring are   language support;
> | static + dynamic    arrays with         ASCII and     is an immutable
> | arrays.             libc's string.h     UTF16 array   array of UTF16
> |                     support functions.  classes.      codepoints.
> 
> It could be a mixture of "what exists" plus "how to do it".

For C that should probably be "char* and wchar_t*" instead...
Support is in <wchar.h> (with the usual C portability issues)

--anders
1 2 3 4
Top | Discussion index | About this forum | D home