View mode: basic / threaded / horizontal-split · Log in · Help
August 03, 2010
Re: Mac OSX installer for dmd
dsimcha, el  3 de agosto a las 02:34 me escribiste:
> == Quote from Walter Bright (newshound2@digitalmars.com)'s article
> > Leandro Lucarella wrote:
> > > For me the problem with D is dependency control. You don't know what
> > > symbol come from which module. Yes, I know you can do explicit
> > > dependencies in D with static and selective imports, the same you can do
> > > the inverse in other languages with the import module.*-like syntax, but
> > > I think D got the default wrong, I prefer explicit by default.
> > It's a reasonable point of view, but the motivating thing for me here is making
> > it easy for people to write quick&dirty programs.
> 
> I truly appreciate D's stance that both quick and dirty code and more heavily
> engineered code need to be supported.  My biggest gripe about languages like Java
> is that they force so much "proper style" on me that I can't just "make it work"
> before I "make it right".
> 
> I love how, using D, I can go from a quick and dirty prototype to a "real"
> program/library without having to switch languages and completely rewrite every
> function.  In bioinformatics research, we do TONS of prototyping/small scripts and
> only a small fraction of these prototypes are fleshed out into serious programs.
> I suspect there are other fields like this, where you just want a quick prototype
> up front, but it may or may not be converted into a proper program depending on
> how the prototype works. Being able to do both in the same language is just an
> outstanding feature.
> 
> Second, being able to write quick/dirty programs lowers the barrier to entry for
> trying out the language.  My first few D programs, back when D was a mere
> curiosity for me, were things like programs that counted the amount of times each
> DNA nucleotide occurred in a sequence.  Of course this is trivial, but if the
> language treated me like a naughty child instead of a consenting adult, I would
> likely not have stuck with it.
> 
> Third, often only part of a program needs to be well-engineered (the core
> algorithms that will likely be around awhile) and the rest is just some quick and
> dirty glue to feed data to the core algorithms, and will likely change in
> relatively short order.  The well-factored core algorithms plus quick and dirty
> glue style is very often how I program in practice.

I agree completely, I hate Java and every programming language where
a readable hello world takes more than 3 SLOC. But I insist I'm talking
about defaults. If D would accept an import module.* syntax, you could
still do quick&dirty without much hassle, but make the dirtyness
explicit.

The argument about having technical problems to implement this model
seems like a good reason (but I guess it should be doable though, at
some point you have to know all the symbols that are present in a source
file, and where they came from).

-- 
Leandro Lucarella (AKA luca)                     http://llucax.com.ar/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
GPG Key: 5F5A8D05 (F8CD F9A7 BF00 5431 4145  104C 949E BFB6 5F5A 8D05)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
<original> [Penis Uptime: 2days 13hrs 59mins 35secs]
<Yapa> viagra? :)
<original> yea, 20 pills
August 03, 2010
Re: Mac OSX installer for dmd
Walter, I suggest you to stop right now to say how much good D module system is and how much good your design is, etc, and to start looking for the problems/holes instead. In my language there is a proverb that says something like "Who praises himself a lot, covers himself with broth" or something similar ^_^ Keep looking for the *design* problems of the D module system, and try to fix them, instead of saying several times how much good D module system is.

Later,
bearophile
August 03, 2010
Re: Mac OSX installer for dmd
bearophile wrote:
> Walter, I suggest you to stop right now to say how much good D module system is and how much good your design is, etc, and to start looking for the problems/holes instead. In my language there is a proverb that says something like "Who praises himself a lot, covers himself with broth" or something similar ^_^ Keep looking for the *design* problems of the D module system, and try to fix them, instead of saying several times how much good D module system is.

I agree with the spirit. Getting in the state we unconditionally believe 
we got it right essentially prevents progress in the matter by halting 
the brain.

That being said, I recall you mentioned a couple of times in the past 
that D's modules have problems. Whenever you substantiated those claims, 
I found the arguments insufficient and ended up forgetting them. Are 
there some bugzilla reports (at the risk of repeating the same question)?


Andrei
August 03, 2010
Re: Mac OSX installer for dmd
On 2010-08-03 08:39, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> bearophile wrote:
>> Walter, I suggest you to stop right now to say how much good D module
>> system is and how much good your design is, etc, and to start looking
>> for the problems/holes instead. In my language there is a proverb that
>> says something like "Who praises himself a lot, covers himself with
>> broth" or something similar ^_^ Keep looking for the *design* problems
>> of the D module system, and try to fix them, instead of saying several
>> times how much good D module system is.
>
> I agree with the spirit. Getting in the state we unconditionally believe
> we got it right essentially prevents progress in the matter by halting
> the brain.
>
> That being said, I recall you mentioned a couple of times in the past
> that D's modules have problems. Whenever you substantiated those claims,
> I found the arguments insufficient and ended up forgetting them. Are
> there some bugzilla reports (at the risk of repeating the same question)?
>
>
> Andrei

How about this one: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3108

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg
August 03, 2010
Re: Mac OSX installer for dmd
Jacob Carlborg wrote:
> On 2010-08-03 08:39, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>> bearophile wrote:
>>> Walter, I suggest you to stop right now to say how much good D module
>>> system is and how much good your design is, etc, and to start looking
>>> for the problems/holes instead. In my language there is a proverb that
>>> says something like "Who praises himself a lot, covers himself with
>>> broth" or something similar ^_^ Keep looking for the *design* problems
>>> of the D module system, and try to fix them, instead of saying several
>>> times how much good D module system is.
>>
>> I agree with the spirit. Getting in the state we unconditionally believe
>> we got it right essentially prevents progress in the matter by halting
>> the brain.
>>
>> That being said, I recall you mentioned a couple of times in the past
>> that D's modules have problems. Whenever you substantiated those claims,
>> I found the arguments insufficient and ended up forgetting them. Are
>> there some bugzilla reports (at the risk of repeating the same question)?
>>
>>
>> Andrei
> 
> How about this one: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3108

Thanks. I voted it up! A cursory reading suggests that neither of those 
are matters of principles, only implementation issues. Is that right?

Andrei
August 03, 2010
Re: Mac OSX installer for dmd
On 2010-08-03 16:20, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> Jacob Carlborg wrote:
>> On 2010-08-03 08:39, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>>> bearophile wrote:
>>>> Walter, I suggest you to stop right now to say how much good D module
>>>> system is and how much good your design is, etc, and to start looking
>>>> for the problems/holes instead. In my language there is a proverb that
>>>> says something like "Who praises himself a lot, covers himself with
>>>> broth" or something similar ^_^ Keep looking for the *design* problems
>>>> of the D module system, and try to fix them, instead of saying several
>>>> times how much good D module system is.
>>>
>>> I agree with the spirit. Getting in the state we unconditionally believe
>>> we got it right essentially prevents progress in the matter by halting
>>> the brain.
>>>
>>> That being said, I recall you mentioned a couple of times in the past
>>> that D's modules have problems. Whenever you substantiated those claims,
>>> I found the arguments insufficient and ended up forgetting them. Are
>>> there some bugzilla reports (at the risk of repeating the same
>>> question)?
>>>
>>>
>>> Andrei
>>
>> How about this one: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3108
>
> Thanks. I voted it up! A cursory reading suggests that neither of those
> are matters of principles, only implementation issues. Is that right?
>
> Andrei

Am not sure about 1441 and I don't think 2529 is just an implementation 
issue.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg
August 03, 2010
Re: Mac OSX installer for dmd
Jacob Carlborg wrote:
> Am not sure about 1441 and I don't think 2529 is just an implementation 
> issue.

2529 is an implementation issue (and I don't agree with Don, I think his 
suggestion breaks encapsulation).
August 03, 2010
Re: Mac OSX installer for dmd
On 2010-08-03 21:28, Walter Bright wrote:
> Jacob Carlborg wrote:
>> Am not sure about 1441 and I don't think 2529 is just an
>> implementation issue.
>
> 2529 is an implementation issue (and I don't agree with Don, I think his
> suggestion breaks encapsulation).

I guess it depends on how one wants it to work, what the intended 
behavior is.

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg
August 04, 2010
Re: Mac OSX installer for dmd
Walter Bright wrote:
> Jacob Carlborg wrote:
>> Am not sure about 1441 and I don't think 2529 is just an 
>> implementation issue.
> 
> 2529 is an implementation issue (and I don't agree with Don, I think his 
> suggestion breaks encapsulation).

Maybe it does. I think the bug should be closed as invalid, because the 
initial suggestion in the bug report is completely wrong: it would drive 
you to put low-level stuff in the root, and derived stuff in the leaves.
Implementing that suggestion would encourage poor design.

I believe D's current approach is what Java does?
August 04, 2010
Re: Mac OSX installer for dmd
Don wrote:
> Walter Bright wrote:
>> Jacob Carlborg wrote:
>>> Am not sure about 1441 and I don't think 2529 is just an 
>>> implementation issue.
>>
>> 2529 is an implementation issue (and I don't agree with Don, I think 
>> his suggestion breaks encapsulation).
> 
> Maybe it does. I think the bug should be closed as invalid, because the 
> initial suggestion in the bug report is completely wrong: it would drive 
> you to put low-level stuff in the root, and derived stuff in the leaves.
> Implementing that suggestion would encourage poor design.

Please add this as a comment to the entry.

> I believe D's current approach is what Java does?

I'm not sure what Java does.
1 2 3 4 5 6
Top | Discussion index | About this forum | D home