Just a thought for boosting D's street cred:

Perhaps...take a worthwhile C/C++ project with real potential, fork it, and port it to D. And make a real commitment to maintaining it. Obviously a bit of a gambit, granted, but the potential payout is improving a worthwhile tool's maintainability while showing off a real-world example of the benefits and practical worthiness of switching to D.

Just a thought.

In a similar vein, I have to say I'm thoroughly impressed with what I've learned of Mir. AIUI, aside from being a fantastic lib, it looks like a tool with very high widespread potential that's written in D, yet also targets, more or less, C/C++ users in addition to D users. A tactic I've definitely been in favor of[1] and would love to see pushed as far as it can go.

Rah rah, D, sys boom bah, insert mental image here of me <https://avatars1.githubusercontent.com/u/714873?v=3&s=460> with pom-poms ;)

[1] https://semitwist.com/articles/article/view/we-re-overlooking-a-key-part-of-c-c-d-user-migration

On Saturday, 4 March 2017 at 07:09:17 UTC, Nick Sabalausky (Abscissa) wrote:
> Just a thought for boosting D's street cred:
>
> Perhaps...take a worthwhile C/C++ project with real potential, fork it, and port it to D. And make a real commitment to maintaining it. Obviously a bit of a gambit, granted, but the potential payout is improving a worthwhile tool's maintainability while showing off a real-world example of the benefits and practical worthiness of switching to D.
>
> Just a thought.
>
> In a similar vein, I have to say I'm thoroughly impressed with what I've learned of Mir. AIUI, aside from being a fantastic lib, it looks like a tool with very high widespread potential that's written in D, yet also targets, more or less, C/C++ users in addition to D users. A tactic I've definitely been in favor of[1] and would love to see pushed as far as it can go.
>
> Rah rah, D, sys boom bah, insert mental image here of me <https://avatars1.githubusercontent.com/u/714873?v=3&s=460> with pom-poms ;)
>
> [1] https://semitwist.com/articles/article/view/we-re-overlooking-a-key-part-of-c-c-d-user-migration

I recently ported this small C++/OpenGL ES 2.0 Android app to D, just finished fixing the last bug I know of:

https://developer.android.com/ndk/samples/sample_teapot.html
https://github.com/googlesamples/android-ndk/tree/master/teapots/classic-teapot/src/main

I need to clean up the source now and commit it to the app samples section in my Android repo:

https://github.com/joakim-noah/android/tree/master/samples

All the apps there are tiny ports from the C samples for the Android NDK.

Obviously not a bigger project like you had in mind, but just thought I'd mention this one.

On 03/04/2017 02:29 AM, Joakim wrote:
>
> I recently ported this small C++/OpenGL ES 2.0 Android app to D, just
> finished fixing the last bug I know of:
>[...]
> Obviously not a bigger project like you had in mind, but just thought
> I'd mention this one.

Actually, that's very cool, particularly since it's Android. In fact, it's one I did specifically have in mind that would be great to see ported to D. Looking forward to seeing the result!

On Saturday, 4 March 2017 at 07:09:17 UTC, Nick Sabalausky (Abscissa) wrote:
> Just a thought for boosting D's street cred:
>
> Perhaps...take a worthwhile C/C++ project with real potential, fork it, and port it to D. And make a real commitment to maintaining it. Obviously a bit of a gambit, granted, but the potential payout is improving a worthwhile tool's maintainability while showing off a real-world example of the benefits and practical worthiness of switching to D.
>
The compiler front-end did just that. I can not comment on the quality of the code but on the speed of compilation, wow, just wow.

Building v2.067 takes 1'38" on the server at work (westmere at 2.2 GHz, gcc 6.2, dmd v2.073, single core build).
Building v2.073 takes 0'15" and most of that time is taken by building the backend which is still in C++.
If that were rewritten in D, I suppose building the compiler would take 2 or 3 seconds max.

Nick Sabalausky (Abscissa) wrote:

> Just a thought for boosting D's street cred:
>
> Perhaps...take a worthwhile C/C++ project with real potential, fork it, and port it to D. And make a real commitment to maintaining it. Obviously a bit of a gambit, granted, but the potential payout is improving a worthwhile tool's maintainability while showing off a real-world example of the benefits and practical worthiness of switching to D.
>
> Just a thought.

my 1 cent: we should stop trying to convert C++ users.

On Saturday, 4 March 2017 at 13:24:25 UTC, ketmar wrote:
> Nick Sabalausky (Abscissa) wrote:
>
>> Just a thought for boosting D's street cred:
>>
>> Perhaps...take a worthwhile C/C++ project with real potential, fork it, and port it to D. And make a real commitment to maintaining it. Obviously a bit of a gambit, granted, but the potential payout is improving a worthwhile tool's maintainability while showing off a real-world example of the benefits and practical worthiness of switching to D.
>>
>> Just a thought.
>
> my 1 cent: we should stop trying to convert C++ users.

Please, do no push devs to do not do something. There are two directions: betterC and DRuntime. I believe in betterC and betterC target is C/C++ industry. Old D users are happy with DRuntime and growing Phobos. This ways are not compatible at least for now. Mir libraries are going to be betterC, the next great betterC goal is DCV.

Ilya

On Saturday, 4 March 2017 at 07:09:17 UTC, Nick Sabalausky (Abscissa) wrote:
> Perhaps...take a worthwhile C/C++ project with real potential, fork it, and port it to D. And make a real commitment to maintaining it. Obviously a bit of a gambit, granted, but the potential payout is improving a worthwhile tool's maintainability while showing off a real-world example of the benefits and practical worthiness of switching to D.
>
> Just a thought.

Maybe it's just me and this isn't to pick on you specifically, but I'm getting tired of all of these threads where people tout various ideas/actions as a way to improve D, make it more popular, cure cancer, solve world hunger, etc with no actual action by the original poster. If you feel strongly about it, then follow the Nike slogan and "Just do it".

On Saturday, 4 March 2017 at 15:35:13 UTC, Ilya Yaroshenko wrote:
> [...]
>>
>> my 1 cent: we should stop trying to convert C++ users.
>
> Please, do no push devs to do not do something. There are two directions: betterC and DRuntime.

I've tried to follow the "betterC" discussion, but so far a precise specification of what betterC is supposed to be eluded me. What I got was that you seem to be judging druntime to be too heavyweight and want something more lightweight, but I was never clear on what exactly.

> I believe in betterC and  betterC target is C/C++ industry. Old D users are happy with DRuntime and growing Phobos.

Please don't throw all "old D users" in the same category, generalizations like that only alienate. On a related note: What I believe in is that D's community can't take another rift like Phobos/Tango, D1/D2, so I've been very skeptical regarding the value of betterC. This doesn't mean I'm happy with druntime and phobos, though.

> This ways are not compatible at least for now.

I must have missed that: Are you saying that someone using druntime in his application will not be able to use "betterC" libraries?

> Mir libraries are going to be betterC, the next great betterC goal is DCV.
>
> Ilya

Would it be possible for you to provide a precise specification of what exactly betterC is going to be? Or, if that already exists, and I have missed it, point me to it?

On Saturday, 4 March 2017 at 16:03:46 UTC, Gerald wrote:
> Maybe it's just me and this isn't to pick on you specifically, but I'm getting tired of all of these threads where people tout various ideas/actions as a way to improve D, make it more popular, cure cancer, solve world hunger, etc with no actual action by the original poster. If you feel strongly about it, then follow the Nike slogan and "Just do it".

These discussion will always come up... but imo it's a good reason why development threads should have their own board separate from General.

On 03/04/2017 11:03 AM, Gerald wrote:
> On Saturday, 4 March 2017 at 07:09:17 UTC, Nick Sabalausky (Abscissa)
> wrote:
>>
>> Just a thought.
>
> Maybe it's just me and this isn't to pick on you specifically, but I'm
> getting tired of all of these threads where people tout various
> ideas/actions as a way to improve D, make it more popular, cure cancer,
> solve world hunger, etc with no actual action by the original poster. If
> you feel strongly about it, then follow the Nike slogan and "Just do it".

*Ahem*

"Just a thought."

;)