View mode: basic / threaded / horizontal-split · Log in · Help
March 28, 2008
Why I Use D
I just love D and use nothing else anymore - if i can help it. 
The gripe i have is:

http://www.digitalmars.com/webnews/newsgroups.php?art_group=digitalmars.D.learn&article_id=11858
(Need to fill and find about 5000 tags and it is a real problem for now.)

Other than that it is great. I am developing a dicom reader/displayer and the code is smaller and easier than anything i have seen and used before in c++ - and i hope to be able to share it soon.
Soon after i hope i will be able to share a dicom server.

What to do i dislike?

1.) i hoped for an easer egg - bug fixes for 2.xx (see http://www.digitalmars.com/webnews/newsgroups.php?art_group=digitalmars.D.learn&article_id=11858)  - macros and more
2.) i hope people will communicate more politely
3.) i wished somebody would port parts of tango to phobos - and phobos be the standard and only library, since i think it hurts D more (tango) than most people think

I am a beginner and  i enjoy D. 
I hope  - "The Safe Subset of D" will be done in a way, that no delays will occure in D 2.XXXX


lurker

sorry for my english
March 28, 2008
Re: Why I Use D
lurker wrote:
> I just love D and use nothing else anymore - if i can help it. 

I like this thread...griping is an easy trap to fall into.  Why do I use D?

* dynamic arrays
* delegates, particularly now that closures work (very cool!)
March 28, 2008
Re: Why I Use D
What do i like ?

* dynamic arrays, slicing
* cleaner OOP (no multiple class inheritance)
* syntax goodies : foreach,foreach-range,the 
array/struct-literals,auto,loop-labels,nested comments
* and i like the transitive const (D2.0) !!!
* delegates
* powerful and yet much more transparent template programming (meta 
porgramming in D in general)

What i dislike ?

* two standard libraries, i think this is a real problem (keeps new 
users away, people i talk about D with consider it too unmature if there 
is such a gap between the stdlib of the reference compiler and the 
community-generated lib, and they simply wont give it a try cause of 
much stuff missing in phobos)
* IDE - We really need full code-completion/suggestion/outlining/goto 
support and all these goodies to convince larger scale teams to switch 
to D (i know Descent is on a good way...)
* some already "ancient" compiler Bugs

Thank you Walter for the great effort and the wonderful language that 
you are dedicating to this thankful but always critical community!


~Stephan
March 29, 2008
Re: Why I Use D
Sometimes it's good to give Walter something to read that isn't 
complaints.  Could not be a bad thing if we all listed our reasons...

Reasons D is used by me:

1. String processing is easy, clean, and straight-forward (even with 
i18n, etc.) in similar ways to other languages I use.

2. When there are bugs in the compiler, I can find out why in many 
cases.  This just makes me happy, and allows me to submit a patch so I 
can hope it will be fixed.

3. The spec is quite clear (although not bug-free), which along with #2 
has allowed me to work on tools for D (namely Visual Studio integration.)

4. With closures, associative arrays, "auto", and similar features I am 
able to (in cases) write code similar to how I would write JavaScript, 
PHP, and other languages I use which are not native.

5. I feel like I have (fairly limited but existing) some way to give 
feedback on the design of the language.

6. Emphasis on slicing and other features that are clearly better for 
performance, and just make sense anyway.


Reasons for which I might not use D:

1. Phobos has bugs/traps, Tango I haven't used as much but the style 
just isn't for me... tend to have to roll much of my own code (HTTP/XML 
processing, basic string handling, service/daemon hookup code, etc.)

2. It's fairly easy to link to other languages, but there are walls for 
sure... this can be a concern, since it's unreasonable for me to push D 
on developers who don't know the language (due to project/budget 
constraints.)

3. Haven't dealt with it too much yet, but I'm concerned const will be 
over-much red tape for some usage...

-[Unknown]


lurker wrote:
> I just love D and use nothing else anymore - if i can help it. 
> The gripe i have is:
> 
> http://www.digitalmars.com/webnews/newsgroups.php?art_group=digitalmars.D.learn&article_id=11858
> (Need to fill and find about 5000 tags and it is a real problem for now.)
> 
> Other than that it is great. I am developing a dicom reader/displayer and the code is smaller and easier than anything i have seen and used before in c++ - and i hope to be able to share it soon.
> Soon after i hope i will be able to share a dicom server.
> 
> What to do i dislike?
> 
> 1.) i hoped for an easer egg - bug fixes for 2.xx (see http://www.digitalmars.com/webnews/newsgroups.php?art_group=digitalmars.D.learn&article_id=11858)  - macros and more
> 2.) i hope people will communicate more politely
> 3.) i wished somebody would port parts of tango to phobos - and phobos be the standard and only library, since i think it hurts D more (tango) than most people think
> 
> I am a beginner and  i enjoy D. 
> I hope  - "The Safe Subset of D" will be done in a way, that no delays will occure in D 2.XXXX
> 
> 
> lurker
> 
> sorry for my english
March 29, 2008
Re: Why I Use D
Unknown W. Brackets wrote:
> Sometimes it's good to give Walter something to read that isn't 
> complaints.  Could not be a bad thing if we all listed our reasons...
> 
> Reasons D is used by me:

Because I can safely troll at #D, unlike ##C++.
// Seriously, speed/control of C(++) with the ease of Python.


-- 
Tomasz Stachowiak
http://h3.team0xf.com/
h3/h3r3tic on #D freenode
March 29, 2008
Re: Why I Use D
I'll tell you what brings me to D.

I'm interested in business programming around event models in large
throughput applications.  What better environment than one which has
method references which retain their object scope, closures which retain
their references (although that only works in DMD currently and I mostly
use GDC, but I'm not missing it much just looking forward to it
working), what seems to be solid garbage collection and nice, expressive
programming at the system level...

The other interest I have, as it is the unfortunate reality of business
applications that many vendor libraries which are required for
integration just aren't meant for asynchronous applications (and for the
sake of scaling across multiple processing channels), is multithreadded
programming.  And when I first heard about const, I was excited.  When I
then looked into just how complex this topic has become, I got weary.

Some phase of D is just what I want in a programming language.  That
phase is somewhere in the middle of D 1.0 and D 2.0, where closures are
added and there weren't so many types of const/invariant behaviors and
syntaxes to figure out.  I like the idea of const, but I don't like the
idea of the language becoming inanely complex for the sake of trying to
solve a problem no other language is able to solve.

Personally, I think the immutability of a real const, read-only view, is
ideal.  The ability to return read-only references to a data structure
that isn't read only sounds like the compiler solving the never-ending
problem I've faced in java of programmers being too sloppy to properly
build immutable objects.

const fixes everything.  But what does invariant give me?  The way I see
it, it's just a way to qualify literal values for most purposes!  And
that I find unnecessary, because they may as well just implicitly be
const.  And theoretically, if const is really a read only view, once you
promote to const, you shouldn't be able to come back out of it.
Honestly, I don't see the reason for everything else...it makes sense to
qualify a method as "doesn't modify the object" so it can be accessible
from a const reference to that object, but 

I love the expressiveness that D has...and while I'm writing this, I'll
take a second to plug my thoughts on array slicing.

array[..] should be synonymous with array[0..$]
array[5..] should be synonymous with array[5..$]/array[5..length]
array[..5] should be synonymous with array[0..5].

This makes the language a little more expressive, makes sense, and
doesn't require $.

Cheers,
   Scott S. McCoy

On Fri, 2008-03-28 at 12:04 -0700, Russell Lewis wrote:

> lurker wrote:
> > I just love D and use nothing else anymore - if i can help it. 
> 
> I like this thread...griping is an easy trap to fall into.  Why do I use D?
> 
> * dynamic arrays
> * delegates, particularly now that closures work (very cool!)
March 29, 2008
Re: Why I Use D
Extrawurst wrote:
> Thank you Walter for the great effort and the wonderful language that 
> you are dedicating to this thankful but always critical community!

You're welcome!

(And I'm aware that if nobody's grumbling about X, then nobody's using X!)
March 29, 2008
Re: Why I Use D
Me too:

Top features of D:
- arrays, including associative arrays and all their goodies (slicing etc.) 
- strings, unicode ftw
- GC AND pointers && friends PLUS C interop
- module system and object orientation
- delegates, including nested functions
- generic programming

D is such a rich language, supporting many styles of programming. Like in
C++ the programmer has a lot of freedom and can make her own tradeoffs,
like in python the language is really productive and enjoyable. 

I'm also very fond of the care that has been given to practical needs: ddoc,
function hijacking, even such simple things as disallowing 'for(int i = 0;
i < 10; i++);', etc. etc. 

And last but not least, although some harsh words have been said (this
always happens though) I think D does have a mature and helpful community
as well as design team, which inspires trust.

Ok, thanks everybody. </fanboy>
March 29, 2008
Re: Why I Use D
On Fri, 28 Mar 2008 22:02:42 +0100, Extrawurst wrote:

> What do i like ?
> 
> * dynamic arrays, slicing
> * cleaner OOP (no multiple class inheritance) * syntax goodies :
> foreach,foreach-range,the array/struct-literals,auto,loop-labels,nested
> comments * and i like the transitive const (D2.0) !!! * delegates
> * powerful and yet much more transparent template programming (meta
> porgramming in D in general)
> 
> What i dislike ?
> 
> * two standard libraries, i think this is a real problem (keeps new
> users away, people i talk about D with consider it too unmature if there
> is such a gap between the stdlib of the reference compiler and the
> community-generated lib, and they simply wont give it a try cause of
> much stuff missing in phobos)
> * IDE - We really need full code-completion/suggestion/outlining/goto
> support and all these goodies to convince larger scale teams to switch
> to D (i know Descent is on a good way...) * some already "ancient"
> compiler Bugs
> 
> Thank you Walter for the great effort and the wonderful language that
> you are dedicating to this thankful but always critical community!
> 
> 
> ~Stephan

This pretty much sums it up for me too.

I think D is fantastic, and I am close to being able to use it for 
project work in my day job. The team I work in is also keen - we are sick 
and tired of C++'s stupidities and ugliness. All that is holding us back 
is the standard litany of GUI, 64-bit, waiting just a bit longer for 2.x 
to mature and the Tango/Phobos split - and they won't hold us back much 
longer.

In preparation I have ported quite a bit of our library code and have had 
wonderful experience, ending up with about 1/3 as much code, and what is 
left is far easier to understand and easier on the eye.
March 29, 2008
Re: Why I Use D
Good to see a thread like this on the NG. Too much of the negative stuff -  
but
it's needed.

What do I like about D?

* Transitive const. I actually thought that const in other languages was
  transitive before Walter told us all it's not. (I never tested it, it  
just
  never occured to me that anyone would do something as illogical as
  non-transitive const :P)
* Array operations, slices, strings, as well as all the other stuff that  
has to
  do with this.
* Garbage collecting. Ok, so there are certain strings attached to using  
it,
  but you can turn it off.
* Code generation. Mixins, CTFE, templates - and so simple and logical.
* Easy linking to C. It's a must, and we know it.
* Compiles to native code.
* Multi-level language. It's assembler, C, Java and more.
* Inline assembler. Makes it easier for me to learn assembler, and having  
just
  one way to do it ensures that the next compiler I bump into will also  
compile
  my code. (at least such is the theory...)
* C++ without all the mucus, shamanic rituals, and eldritch incantations.


What do I not like about D?

* Enum. While I understand some people use keyword count as an indication  
of
  language worth, I heartily disagree. And enum is to me a list of elements
  related to each other, with no defined value except the name (unless you
  choose to assign them values, of course).
* Template/CTFE/Mixin error messages. Well, they're ok on their own, but  
I'd
  like to be able to tell the user 'this and that is wrong with your  
template
  instantion/CTFE function in file foo at line bar'.
* Old bugs. When something doesn't work, and the answer you get when you  
ask is
  "It's in bugzilla, been there since Adam and Eve walked the earth", it  
doesn't
  quite make me smile and dance and sing.


All in all, D is the language I want. It's not perfect (yet :P), but it's  
close
to what I want for most things.

Now, I think the only thing that remains is to say thank you. To Walter,
especially. But also to Andrei and the others who help, to the Tango team  
and
others who create important libraries for D, and to everyone on the  
newsgroup.
D wouldn't be what it is without you.

-- Simen
« First   ‹ Prev
1 2
Top | Discussion index | About this forum | D home