May 06, 2012
On Sunday, 6 May 2012 at 14:43:45 UTC, Russel Winder wrote:
> [...]
>
> Of course there are still people using 1.3 which is outrageous.

The consulting company I work for, still gets requests for
proposals
using 1.4, which is not any better.

Actually, last year was the first time I took part on a project
where
1.6 was allowed. And before that, we did a migration to 1.5 in
another
project.

Product deployment in the enterprise world is a pain.

--
Paulo

May 07, 2012
On Sun, 2012-05-06 at 19:41 +0200, Paulo Pinto wrote:
> On Sunday, 6 May 2012 at 14:43:45 UTC, Russel Winder wrote:
> > [...]
> >
> > Of course there are still people using 1.3 which is outrageous.
> 
> The consulting company I work for, still gets requests for
> proposals
> using 1.4, which is not any better.

I know of no comprehensible reason why any new Java project is not using Java 7, other than incompetence somewhere in the decision making.

> Actually, last year was the first time I took part on a project
> where
> 1.6 was allowed. And before that, we did a migration to 1.5 in
> another
> project.

Migrating from pre Java 5 to Java 5 seems like a very bad decision given Java 5 died a long time ago. Any migration has to be to Java 7.

> Product deployment in the enterprise world is a pain.

Only because of bad planning or decision making.

The analogies for D are clear.  The conclusion is that we need to find resource to ensure the GDC and LDC folks are supporting the same version of D that DMD is supporting at any time. Currently DMD is at 2.059 whilst GDC is at 2.057. Not a planning problem as far as I am aware, just a resource problem: i.e. not enough people paid, directly or indirectly to work on these compilers.

-- 
Russel. ============================================================================= Dr Russel Winder      t: +44 20 7585 2200   voip: sip:russel.winder@ekiga.net 41 Buckmaster Road    m: +44 7770 465 077   xmpp: russel@winder.org.uk London SW11 1EN, UK   w: www.russel.org.uk  skype: russel_winder


May 07, 2012
May 07, 2012
Usually those decisions have to do with different deppartments have a
say on the matter and certification processes.

If a project to extend an existing system is done on the current development
system, then only the new project needs to be tested.

On the other hand if the system needs to be migrated to a  newer version, then
usually a costly certification process has to take place.

This is nothing new.  I also endured this scenario with C, C++ and Delphi deployments.

Typicall enterprise scenarion where the company does not want to pay for newer compiler
versions, or go through the internal certification process just to allow some developers to use a few nicer
compiler features without any business value (a very common argument).

--
Paulo

"Russel Winder"  wrote in message news:mailman.374.1336371599.24740.digitalmars-d@puremagic.com...
On Sun, 2012-05-06 at 19:41 +0200, Paulo Pinto wrote:
> On Sunday, 6 May 2012 at 14:43:45 UTC, Russel Winder wrote:
> > [...]
> >
> > Of course there are still people using 1.3 which is outrageous.
>
> The consulting company I work for, still gets requests for
> proposals
> using 1.4, which is not any better.

I know of no comprehensible reason why any new Java project is not using
Java 7, other than incompetence somewhere in the decision making.

> Actually, last year was the first time I took part on a project
> where
> 1.6 was allowed. And before that, we did a migration to 1.5 in
> another
> project.

Migrating from pre Java 5 to Java 5 seems like a very bad decision given
Java 5 died a long time ago. Any migration has to be to Java 7.

> Product deployment in the enterprise world is a pain.

Only because of bad planning or decision making.

The analogies for D are clear.  The conclusion is that we need to find
resource to ensure the GDC and LDC folks are supporting the same version
of D that DMD is supporting at any time. Currently DMD is at 2.059
whilst GDC is at 2.057. Not a planning problem as far as I am aware,
just a resource problem: i.e. not enough people paid, directly or
indirectly to work on these compilers.

-- 
Russel.
=============================================================================
Dr Russel Winder      t: +44 20 7585 2200   voip: sip:russel.winder@ekiga.net
41 Buckmaster Road    m: +44 7770 465 077   xmpp: russel@winder.org.uk
London SW11 1EN, UK   w: www.russel.org.uk  skype: russel_winder 

Next ›   Last »
1 2
Top | Discussion index | About this forum | D home