View mode: basic / threaded / horizontal-split · Log in · Help
July 21, 2004
Re: Cross-Platform D
Sean Kelly wrote:

> It will, but this may not all make it in for 1.0.  D is multithread-aware (it
> has a "synchronized" keyword) but advanced primitives are still in development.
> And Phobos already has a Socket class, but more advanced socket IO will likely
> not come until after 1.0 as it depends on advanced threading techniques.

Well, wouldn't it make the compiler extremely complex to have threading 
built inside? I can see how it would make D extremely awesome as it is 
one of the features in Java that makes it so great. It would force the 
compiler to be built for each OS out there. Some OS use POSIX threads 
and Windows uses OS/2 system. Of course if Windows ever made a Visual D 
they probably wouldn't have any trouble creating the threading framework.

It would make treading easier for the programmer but harder for the 
person or people creating the compiler.

> This will come with time.  For now I'd prefer to have a small well-designed
> library and then later extend that than to have a large library mostly
> containing stuff that's poorly designed.

I guess I agree, I believe whatever everyone else believes. I AM sheep.

> No license issues with Phobos, but I personally think it lacks a bit of
> cohesion.  Before D becomes official I'd like to see a careful review of
> everything in Phobos with a mind for consistency and interoperability.

I agree, the bit about adding documentation is good because it forces 
people to be coherent and explain what they are doing. This opposed to 
just halfassing the source with no documentation and leaving the 
programmer to guess work the bugs and workarounds.

> This will probably come a bit later.  There was some talk of a semi-formal
> review board for Phobos stuff but it never materialized.  I think people are
> waiting for the language to settle down a bit more first.

What about WIKI? Isn't there some information on there or can some 
information be posted there. Are the developers of Phobos 1337 or just 
some Joe off the street?

> Yes.  In fact, the ultimate goal it to have D standardized.  Until then however,
> many members of the community are pretty much doing that anyway, what with bug
> reports, feature requests, and submissions.

Even after D is standardized we probably won't see anything good come of 
 it for a while. I feel that one of the problems with C and C++ is that 
changes to the compiler to add great and new features is such a 
difficult and LONG task. People have their own perspective on what the 
language should be and what it should have. It already has been a long 
wait for D to reach version 1.0 and the features it does have are wonderful.

The only thing that is missing is version 1.0 of the compiler without 
and bugs. A great IDE that is also in final that compiles the code, does 
your dishes, and makes your bed. I haven't seen DTL but from what I have 
heard of it seems to be awesome and if it isn't then it will be in a 
short time. Demios from what is in it now is great and the primary 
developers are adding features that make it even more so.

The documentation on the language needs to be redone for the final 
release of the Compiler detailing (and I stress Detailing) ALL the 
features and how to use them, sample source on how to do everything. 
From Inline Assembly to Direct interfacing with Hardware to every 
possible way to use an array. From the tinyest feature to a most 
difficult. If Walter and/or friends were to make a COMPREHENSIVE book 
for D then I would buy it.
July 21, 2004
Re: Cross-Platform D
In article <cdmmoa$1jr$1@digitaldaemon.com>, Gold Dragon says...
>
>Sean Kelly wrote:
>
>> It will, but this may not all make it in for 1.0.  D is multithread-aware (it
>> has a "synchronized" keyword) but advanced primitives are still in development.
>> And Phobos already has a Socket class, but more advanced socket IO will likely
>> not come until after 1.0 as it depends on advanced threading techniques.
>
>Well, wouldn't it make the compiler extremely complex to have threading 
>built inside? I can see how it would make D extremely awesome as it is 
>one of the features in Java that makes it so great. It would force the 
>compiler to be built for each OS out there. Some OS use POSIX threads 
>and Windows uses OS/2 system. Of course if Windows ever made a Visual D 
>they probably wouldn't have any trouble creating the threading framework.

It's really too bad that MS didn't make more of an effort for full POSIX
support.  It actually exists as part of Windows Services for Unix, but that's an
entirely new susbsystem so it's unrealistic to ask users to install it.  I think
when D gets better threading it will be a library addition, likely eventually a
part of Phobos.  There's no real need for full language support, though I agree
that it would be pretty cool to have condvars as first class citizens (assuming
that level of integration would actually increase ease of use).

>> Yes.  In fact, the ultimate goal it to have D standardized.  Until then however,
>> many members of the community are pretty much doing that anyway, what with bug
>> reports, feature requests, and submissions.
>
>Even after D is standardized we probably won't see anything good come of 
>  it for a while. I feel that one of the problems with C and C++ is that 
>changes to the compiler to add great and new features is such a 
>difficult and LONG task. People have their own perspective on what the 
>language should be and what it should have. It already has been a long 
>wait for D to reach version 1.0 and the features it does have are wonderful.

The schedule for C/C++ is 5 years, and I think this is the rule for software
standards.  I actually really like this as it gives the community time to offer
plenty of constructive feedback and helps reduce the risk of knee-jerk resposes
to new ideas.  Language stability over time is a real selling point to me, at
least once the language is at a point where it does everything I want it to ;)

>The only thing that is missing is version 1.0 of the compiler without 
>and bugs. A great IDE that is also in final that compiles the code, does 
>your dishes, and makes your bed. I haven't seen DTL but from what I have 
>heard of it seems to be awesome and if it isn't then it will be in a 
>short time. Demios from what is in it now is great and the primary 
>developers are adding features that make it even more so.

I would love to have a good source-level IDE for D.  I've never been a
tremendous fan of printf debugging :)

>The documentation on the language needs to be redone for the final 
>release of the Compiler detailing (and I stress Detailing) ALL the 
>features and how to use them, sample source on how to do everything. 
> From Inline Assembly to Direct interfacing with Hardware to every 
>possible way to use an array. From the tinyest feature to a most 
>difficult. If Walter and/or friends were to make a COMPREHENSIVE book 
>for D then I would buy it.

A book is in the works, so consider your wish granted.  We still need a complete
and accurate spec, but this sort of thing takes time and I really don't expect
one until after 1.0.  And by spec I mean something more like the C or C++ spec
than the Java spec.


Sean
July 21, 2004
Re: Cross-Platform D
Sha Chancellor wrote:
> Warning: This issue has probably been addressed before, but I'm going to
> start it up again.

The GUI library issue has been brought up, but it hasn't really been 
resolved either.

> First let me say I love D, it's a great language.  C and C++ are also
> nice languages.  Their ISO standards are nice in that they provide a good
> way to write simple programs that are (relatively) cross-platform. 
> However, they lack some huge things, namely: threading, gui, and sockets. 
> It would be nice to see the runtime library for D include these features.
> I recognize that there is a lot of different projects around for D that
> tout cross-platform GUI APIs.  But it would be nice to have *one* that
> was part of the runtime library.  Something that you could put in a good
> about D, and expect to work.  I realize a lot of things are platform
> specific, and can never be implemented in a general GUI API.  But it would
> be nice to have something available.

I think the only cross-platform GUI library out there right now is DUI.

The DWT team may be planning on going cross-platform, but they're still 
in what I would call "the early stages". It's not vaporware, but it's a 
massive undertaking and a lot of effort is required just to get files 
compiled. (It's a port of IBM's Java SWT.)

In case you didn't know, there's a list of GUI projects:
http://www.prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?AvailableGuiLibraries

> Another thing, right on the website D is compared with Java in a number
> of ways.  Mainly from a syntax/feature standpoint.  However, one of the
> nicest aspects of Java is that there is a HUGE amount of classes already
> there for you to abuse.  What's more, they're part of the standard
> installation.  You don't have to go find them for every OS and platform, or
> include them with your installer.  This is something D currently lacks.
> I don't see any site or group around that maintains such a thing for D. 

The libraries will be written. There are quite a few wrapper projects 
floating around. I think that as the language stabilizes more native D 
libraries will be written.


>  Is this all done by Walter?  Phobos is nice, but it's pretty minimal,
> and i've heard there are license issues with it.  I don't know if those
> have been resolved, but it would be nice to have an open runtime that
> was covered under some type of artistic or LGPL license.  It would also be
> nice to have a central body of people to oversee and maintain it, and a
> single website for such a project that could contain documentation and
> the likes.

Walter has had some help with Phobos, but he's slow in responding to 
submitted material (something about being busy adding compiler features 
and fixing bugs). Hopefully, as D 1.0 arrives, he'll have more time to 
corral Phobos contributions.

The license issues will be ironed out. I think mostly the current 
license isn't explicit enough or not quite all of the bits of Phobos are 
licensed correctly.


> Even if such a project was started, would Walter be willing to endorse
> it as an official project?

I think he would endorse a finished product if it met his standards. So 
start coding and come back and submit it when it's complete. ;)


Seriously, though, you can either:

1. Assist one of the existing projects. (Who would turn down a volunteer?)

or

2. Start your own. (dsource.org would even host it.)


I think Walter has indicated before that he'd consider shipping someone 
else's GUI library with the compiler, but he doesn't plan on creating it 
himself.


> I don't know, maybe I'm full of it, but what do you guys think?  Walter?
>  Comments please...

(By the way, feel free to use paragraphs.)

-- 
Justin (a/k/a jcc7)
http://jcc_7.tripod.com/d/
July 22, 2004
Re: Cross-Platform D
> But there's no "official" location, wiki, or otherwise.  I don't know..
> I mean there's dsource.org and I know there is a wiki at the moment
> that's maintaining some documentation.  But it'd be nice to see something
> more formal.
>  

I have a feeling that in the future, www.dsource.org and WIKI will 
either be *the* places to be for stuff on D. To many have sources all 
over the place. If more people posted at a centralized location or added 
their links to WIKI then it would be more visual on how much is being 
done towards libraries and generalized programs.
Top | Discussion index | About this forum | D home