It's kind of ironic, isn't it? D is marketed as a language that is much easier to build tools for (It's mentioned in numerous places on the website), and yet we see that there's quite a bit of trouble in getting the tools to work nicely with D.

I for one fully agree with you on this, having spend a lot of my time in recent years coding in c# and the tool support (from an IDE perspective) that comes a along with programming in .Net, I agree that the coding productivity in bigger applications receives a good boost by an IDE with the features you describe.

To an extend, I'm actually surprised that there is no good cross platform IDE written in D(2) already as it would be a very good show case for the language and help to lower to barrier for other people to adopt the language (definitly if it were to support a gui designer (QtD, GtkD or sometime else) of some sort directly from the IDE, so people feel they have a complete package to create D(2) application easily.

I would even personally happely pay for such a tool (if it were cross platform at least) if were only available under a commercial license...

fil.

On 2011-01-14 10:49, %fil wrote:
> I for one fully agree with you on this, having spend a lot of my
> time in recent years coding in c# and the tool support (from an
> IDE perspective) that comes a along with programming in .Net, I
> agree that the coding productivity in bigger applications receives
> a good boost by an IDE with the features you describe.
>
> To an extend, I'm actually surprised that there is no good cross
> platform IDE written in D(2) already as it would be a very good
> show case for the language and help to lower to barrier for other
> people to adopt the language (definitly if it were to support a
> gui designer (QtD, GtkD or sometime else) of some sort directly
> from the IDE, so people feel they have a complete package to
> create D(2) application easily.
>
> I would even personally happely pay for such a tool (if it were
> cross platform at least) if were only available under a commercial
> license...
>
> fil.

The reason, as I see it, that this hasn't happened yet (I assume that this would be written in D) is:

* The reference compiler is written in C++
* There isn't any GUI library that most of the community seems satisfied with
* The support for dynamic libraries is limited

These are the only ones I could think for now

-- 
/Jacob Carlborg

On 14/01/2011 09:49, %fil wrote:
> I for one fully agree with you on this, having spend a lot of my
> time in recent years coding in c# and the tool support (from an
> IDE perspective) that comes a along with programming in .Net, I
> agree that the coding productivity in bigger applications receives
> a good boost by an IDE with the features you describe.
>
> To an extend, I'm actually surprised that there is no good cross
> platform IDE written in D(2) already as it would be a very good
> show case for the language and help to lower to barrier for other
> people to adopt the language (definitly if it were to support a
> gui designer (QtD, GtkD or sometime else) of some sort directly
> from the IDE, so people feel they have a complete package to
> create D(2) application easily.
>
> I would even personally happely pay for such a tool (if it were
> cross platform at least) if were only available under a commercial
> license...
>
> fil.

A good cross-platform IDE written in D? There is not even a good cross-platform *D compiler* written in D... how about we start there first, no? (even if just in terms of a wishlist)

-- 
Bruno Medeiros - Software Engineer