May 01, 2005
Matthew wrote:
>>>First informative link from front page is a link to comparation table. First
>>>look at this table shows that D has more features than others. But more
>>>detailed look shows that many of this features are not missing in other
>>>languages but raser implemented as libraries. Reasons for doing it in
>>>compiler are not described here.
>>
>>Listen, he admits in the first paragraph he's counting what's available in each language. Most people expect that the items in such a comparison list are going to be selected to favor the language being endorsed.
>>
>>Also, if someone has to be told that it might be a lot cooler to have a feature built-in as opposed to hacked-in, they may not be a programmer.
> 
> 
> Wow!
> 
> First, huge respect for misrepresenting Vladimir's contrasting of built-in vs libraries with the much more colourful and loaded "built-in as opposed to hacked-in". (I guess that's a useful tactic in debate when the foundation of your argument is built on sand.)
> 
> Second, if you'll permit me a similar indulgence to re-re-write your response as "if someone has to be told that it might be a lot cooler to have a feature built-in as opposed to [in a library], they may not be a programmer", then I would have to address that by saying that's one of the most stupid things I think anyone's ever said on this newsgroup. Well done!
> 
> Why don't you email Bjarn Stroustrup or Guido van Rossum, and see if they agree?

I apologize to Vladimir if I misrepresented anything he wrote. I promise it was accidental. I guess I'm in over my head here. Sorry for wasting everyone's time.

-- 
jcc7
http://jcc_7.tripod.com/d/
May 01, 2005
"Walter" <newshound@digitalmars.com> wrote in message news:d4vlsg$4l7$2@digitaldaemon.com...
>
> "Matthew" <admin@stlsoft.dot.dot.dot.dot.org> wrote in message news:d4ud9f$1qrc$1@digitaldaemon.com...
>> I just don't see D as an alternative to scripting languages.
>> DMDScript might, but I've not (yet) used it, and don't really
>> know
>> anything about it.
>
> DMDScript is an implementation of ECMA262 (i.e. javascript). It
> has nothing
> to do with D, other than being implemented in D.

nothing?

I thought it shared a lot of the syntax, char[] and whatnot? Oh well, I stand corrected.


May 01, 2005
Derek Parnell says...
>
>On Wed, 27 Apr 2005 09:26:18 +1000, Matthew wrote:
>
>> I've read a couple of things recently that've indicated that D's not taken seriously by the C++ world.
>
>I'm not in the C++ plus world, nor are my professional colleagues, but I'm wondering if D's target audience is not the current C/C++/C#/Java crowd. Instead, might it be found in the Perl, Python, Ruby, Euphoria, and total-newbie groups that have not been exposed to the foibles of the 'C' legacy, and are looking for speed, power, and simplicity?
>
>Would attempting to "sell" to this set of people be a useful exercise?

That is a great idea.  However, we need to get COM to work with D.  Most of us, python, perl, JScript folks use lots of COM programming, which these work.  But, you're right, this will grow D's popularity.  I find that D is as easy as python, which is very easy.  So, the scripting folks will love to have an executable instead of an script powered by a some interpreter.

Just a thought...

josé


May 01, 2005
Matthias Becker says...
>
>>> I've read a couple of things recently that've indicated that D's not taken seriously by the C++ world.
>>
>>I'm not in the C++ plus world, nor are my professional colleagues, but I'm wondering if D's target audience is not the current C/C++/C#/Java crowd. Instead, might it be found in the Perl, Python, Ruby, Euphoria, and total-newbie groups that have not been exposed to the foibles of the 'C' legacy, and are looking for speed, power, and simplicity?
>
>A Python programmer looking for simplicity should switch to D? Have you ever looked at Python?

I have used python and written many server/client applications based on python and, though python is pretty simple, D is not far away from it.

josé


May 01, 2005
Matthew says...
>
>
>"Derek Parnell" <derek@psych.ward> wrote in message news:2ddk2n5oayb6$.1lycbdczpdp9w$.dlg@40tude.net...
>> On Wed, 27 Apr 2005 09:26:18 +1000, Matthew wrote:
>>
>>> I've read a couple of things recently that've indicated that D's
>>> not
>>> taken seriously by the C++ world.
>>
>> I'm not in the C++ plus world, nor are my professional colleagues,
>> but I'm
>> wondering if D's target audience is not the current C/C++/C#/Java
>> crowd.
>> Instead, might it be found in the Perl, Python, Ruby, Euphoria,
>> and
>> total-newbie groups that have not been exposed to the foibles of
>> the 'C'
>> legacy, and are looking for speed, power, and simplicity?
>>
>> Would attempting to "sell" to this set of people be a useful exercise?
>
>Without built-in regex, it's not going to sell as an alternative to Perl or Ruby.

With all due respect, what is so hard about,

import std.regexp;

That's all one needs.  Of course, the syntax is different, but it's a few minutes of learning it and it won't be that hard.


>
>And I can't see how it's ever going to be a credible alternative to Python, which takes simplicity and usability to the extreme and, perhaps more importantly, a wealth of libraries.

Well, hmmmm, let's see: speed, stand-along executable, did I mentioned speed?



May 01, 2005
"Matthew" <admin@stlsoft.dot.dot.dot.dot.org> wrote in message news:d51c57$1kir$1@digitaldaemon.com...
>
> "Walter" <newshound@digitalmars.com> wrote in message news:d4vlsg$4l7$2@digitaldaemon.com...
> >
> > "Matthew" <admin@stlsoft.dot.dot.dot.dot.org> wrote in message news:d4ud9f$1qrc$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> >> I just don't see D as an alternative to scripting languages.
> >> DMDScript might, but I've not (yet) used it, and don't really
> >> know
> >> anything about it.
> >
> > DMDScript is an implementation of ECMA262 (i.e. javascript). It
> > has nothing
> > to do with D, other than being implemented in D.
>
> nothing?
>
> I thought it shared a lot of the syntax, char[] and whatnot? Oh well, I stand corrected.

The syntax has superficial similarities, both being curly brace languages, but the D language has as much in common with the DMDScript language as C++ does to Ruby.


May 01, 2005
J C Calvarese wrote:
> Do you still have 3600 seconds in your hours or have converted to metric time? Let's not get into some waste of time argument about how "my meter is longer than your yard". Generally, people like that to which they're accustomed. If I see 04-05, I think April 5 before I consider it might be May 4. If I see 04-05-02, I guess it's April 5, 2002, but it could be May 2, 2004.
> 
> On the other hand, when I embed the date in a filename, I usually use YYYY_MM_DD because I like how it sorts. Go ISO!
> 

I also use that format, all the time (except with dashes, instead of underscores).

Honestly, baring some obvious exceptions, I never know a date in a short format.


-- 
Carlos Santander Bernal
May 01, 2005
"Vladimir" <kv11111@mail.ru> wrote in message news:d4tsjv$1ate$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> First informative link from front page is a link to comparation table.
First
> look at this table shows that D has more features than others. But more detailed look shows that many of this features are not missing in other languages but raser implemented as libraries. Reasons for doing it in compiler are not described here.
>
> It's not obvious that moving a big part of library into compiler is good. Many people even convinced that this is evil, and have a reasons for it. So, if doing so, *very* *good* description of it's benefits must be
written
> and placed just beside saying thad D has built-in dynamic and assosiative arrays. Without it a lot of C/C++ programmers just stop reading here.

I've added a new page to hopefully address this. Comments welcome. www.digitalmars.com/d/builtin.html


May 01, 2005
> 
> The example text is also color coded there.  One way to achieve this almost transparently is JavaScript (yes, I know it was mentioned as to be avoided) - for example, any <pre> elements with a class set to code could be found and colored in an automated fashion.  If JavaScript was disabled, it'd just be black on white.  This would mean adding one line to every file, and adding the class... and not worrying about it.

One can just do it with CSS without having to resort to JS. Works even in most of the GUI browser that has js disabled.

> Of course, that assumes some sort of color coding (which I hope you'll agree most programmers like) is desirable.  And, obviously, with the print media the color could be forced as black - because, again, screen and print are different worlds these days.

Again, CSS is perfectly design for that. "media=print" and set the things you want.



KTC

-- 
Experience is a good school but the fees are high.
    - Heinrich Heine
May 01, 2005
> One can just do it with CSS without having to resort to JS. Works even in most of the GUI browser that has js disabled.

Obviously.  Of course the JavaScript would use CSS.  However, would you rather write regular code, or bother yourself *for every example* to color code all the code?  It'd also be a lot easier to make mistakes.

> Again, CSS is perfectly design for that. "media=print" and set the things you want.

I thought that was implied.  Unless you thought I meant to use JavaScript to restyle the entire page when you print it... no, a @media or separate stylesheet is what I meant.  Still, this doesn't make using JavaScript less desirable (or even change how desirable it is) for the above named reasons.

The point is, making the color coding manual quite obviously reduces the "hand-editable"-ness of the code.  If I were working with (cached) generated content, I would have a function to color code the examples server-side, instead of client side... but it shouldn't matter, because those who have JavaScript off are likely not to want color coding anyway.

-[Unknown]
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Top | Discussion index | About this forum | D home