On Thursday, 4 June 2020 at 04:54:53 UTC, bauss wrote:

>
> I don't really care much about libraries, I'm the kind of guy to write most stuff myself.
>
I like that attitude. Well, I hope you have written your own GUI library ? At least for Windows ?

On Thursday, 4 June 2020 at 19:23:35 UTC, Vinod K Chandran wrote:
> On Thursday, 4 June 2020 at 04:54:53 UTC, bauss wrote:
>
>>
>> I don't really care much about libraries, I'm the kind of guy to write most stuff myself.
>>
> I like that attitude. Well, I hope you have written your own GUI library ? At least for Windows ?

i have!

On Thursday, 4 June 2020 at 19:23:35 UTC, Vinod K Chandran wrote:
> On Thursday, 4 June 2020 at 04:54:53 UTC, bauss wrote:
>>
>> I don't really care much about libraries, I'm the kind of guy to write most stuff myself.
>>
> I like that attitude. Well, I hope you have written your own GUI library ? At least for Windows ?

I like to "stand on the shoulders of giants": so I choose to use high-quality libraries as much as I can find, then I can concentrate my energy on my own problem domain.

On Thursday, 4 June 2020 at 18:05:49 UTC, welkam wrote:
> On Thursday, 4 June 2020 at 11:59:33 UTC, Manu wrote:
>> It's bizarre and insane that gamedev is populated by zealots that would
>> rather piss away insane amounts of money than to ask the question if
>> there's any better way out there.
>
> Hellblade: Senua's Sacrifice shows how inefficient some game studios are at making playable content. For 30€ there is a lot of game in it. Compared that to other projects where 2 mil copies sold at 60€ is below expectation and not financially sustainable.

There's lots of indie games, and some solo developed games that illustrate this. AAA games focus on the wrong things and don't take risks because they are so expensive. It's why some games have endless sequels, making something new is a risk. Don't get me wrong, having a nice realistic looking game is pretty. But as long as it has some sort of art style, you don't have to pour millions into making it look that realistic.

>> Why don't we fix them? Mostly political bullshit... mostly because I need
>> to convince Walter & Andrei what's important without always being able to
>> present concrete cases.
>
> I have seen your proposals and they look like you want to fix your problem quickly and with least amount of work. This is good approach for game development but bad for language changes. If you make a mistake in game no big deal. But if you make a mistake in language design you might have to pay for that mistake for over a decade. Should I say string auto decoding...

No one knows what will be good or not. Look at DIP1028, almost everyone thought it was a terrible idea but it almost went on through anyways. It took a s-storm to have it be undone. A lot of the work Manu has done has been on the practical side, you can reason about it with rationality. And it being used in practice, as he actually codes and isn't as worried about ideology. I think you aren't giving Manu the acknowledgement he deserves. What he has pushed for and got into the language has been a net gain for me.

On Fri, Jun 5, 2020 at 4:10 AM welkam via Digitalmars-d < digitalmars-d@puremagic.com> wrote:

> On Thursday, 4 June 2020 at 11:59:33 UTC, Manu wrote:
> > It's bizarre and insane that gamedev is populated by zealots
> > that would
> > rather piss away insane amounts of money than to ask the
> > question if
> > there's any better way out there.
>
> Hellblade: Senua's Sacrifice shows how inefficient some game studios are at making playable content. For 30€ there is a lot of game in it. Compared that to other projects where 2 mil copies sold at 60€ is below expectation and not financially sustainable.
>
> > Why don't we fix them? Mostly political bullshit... mostly
> > because I need
> > to convince Walter & Andrei what's important without always
> > being able to
> > present concrete cases.
>
> I have seen your proposals and they look like you want to fix your problem quickly and with least amount of work. This is good approach for game development but bad for language changes. If you make a mistake in game no big deal. But if you make a mistake in language design you might have to pay for that mistake for over a decade. Should I say string auto decoding...
>

'Quickly'? 'Least amount of work'? Pfft... like what?

I've been hammering away for almost 12 years. I've carried lots of missions
that spanned many years.
I was banging on about `scope` (which we finally have) for the entire
duration of dconf 2013, and ceaselessly after that.
I'm not aware of anything I've motivated being a failure or having done
damage to D.

D is riddled with small mistakes. Most of my effort has been related to
fixing them, with varying levels of success.
I certainly have no part in string auto-decoding!

I've spent the last 2 years trying to talk about `shared`, while **spectacularly huge** opportunities just sail on by. We've made very small incremental (and broken) progress. The important stuff has been blocked, and no counter-proposals ever presented. Blizzard is one of the biggest and most important gamedev houses in the world; imagine if there were some D code at the heart of all future Blizzard games. What could that bring to D in terms of interest, resources, manpower, etc. We're a $50 billion company. My current project would benefit *enormously* from D and various key colleagues are interested to learn more, but a couple of the key benefits just have broken implementations (ie, shared), which I can't possibly demonstrate to my colleagues without a fix... a broken demonstration is a demonstration of why NOT to use D rather than why we should. `pragma(inline)` is another one that I just need to work right for our project but it's broken in an insane way. It's comical, because Walter added that in ~2011 specifically because I showed that we needed it, but then the implementation doesn't actually work right (from the day it was merged), and I haven't been able to use it. It exists because I needed it, but it never satisfied the one customer that asked for it... and that's a weirdly common pattern in dlang dev.

It's like, one little thing can ruin the entire case when it's a critical thing. I can say it's important... but then it's really hard to gather consensus that it's important. `shared` is broken, I've done what work I can do alone, but if it's rejected, other people need to step in and make a counter proposal, or if nobody wants to after 2 years missed opportunity, then just get out of the way and let me get on with it. I know what we need to do with shared.

So, I'll refer back to that thing I said above that you responded to; I don't know how to convince key folks that shared is really important any more than I am able to say "shared is really important, and this opportunity depends on it"...?

Back on-topic; I still use D because I just can't stand C++, and I somehow fundamentally believe D can 'get there'... but god is it a hard and frustrating road! Eternally so close, but always juuuust misses the mark. Maybe one day we'll land the shot >_<

Manu is a walking talking use case for D.

If there was a single person who would be worth spending millions of dollars to satisfy, its him.

On Wednesday, 3 June 2020 at 11:12:08 UTC, aberba wrote:
> I personally can't use any other system programming language due to the expressiveness and familiarity of D. Its familiar and some syntactic expressiveness are just hard to get in other systems languages...feels easier to model code in D.
>
> I don't use D primarily for work (Node.Js due to packages and cloud support...web services), but D is my go-to system language. Personally, wished I could use D for everything.
>
> I like the community here better, I like the engagement and support. Yeah, it's not perfect but way better than anywhere else I've been.
>
> What [about] you?

Because I get paid for it...

And because my new language project isn't ready yet. ;-)

IMO, D is the worst best language. It simultaneously goes so far in useful directions that it makes using any other C-like painful, but still falls so far short of what it itself shows is possible. (shared, immutable, copy constructors, the half-working lifetime tracking, great templates with horrible performance, mixin but no macros, ddoc but no introspection...) I think that's the reason why D people keep wandering off to make their own compilers. Lisp has somewhat the same property, but there's less impetus to go off and make your own Lisp because the base language is so very extensible.

On Wednesday, 3 June 2020 at 11:12:08 UTC, aberba wrote:
> I personally can't use any other system programming language due to the expressiveness and familiarity of D. Its familiar and some syntactic expressiveness are just hard to get in other systems languages...feels easier to model code in D.
>
> I don't use D primarily for work (Node.Js due to packages and cloud support...web services), but D is my go-to system language. Personally, wished I could use D for everything.
>
> I like the community here better, I like the engagement and support. Yeah, it's not perfect but way better than anywhere else I've been.
>
> What are you?

Learning D made me a better C++ developer, which was previously my language of choice.
Also, there's not other language where I can express my thoughts the way I do it in D (so, modeling power).

On Thu, 2020-06-04 at 19:31 +0000, mw via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On Thursday, 4 June 2020 at 19:23:35 UTC, Vinod K Chandran wrote:
> > On Thursday, 4 June 2020 at 04:54:53 UTC, bauss wrote:
> > > I don't really care much about libraries, I'm the kind of guy to write most stuff myself.
> > > 
> > I like that attitude. Well, I hope you have written your own GUI library ? At least for Windows ?
> 
> I like to "stand on the shoulders of giants": so I choose to use high-quality libraries as much as I can find, then I can concentrate my energy on my own problem domain.

I just had a situation in Rust where I found a crate that a lot of people use and is maintained, added two derive annotations to various bits of my code, deleted half the code in a large module  of my code and increased the functionality and capability of my code.

I like good libraries.

-- 
Russel.
===========================================
Dr Russel Winder      t: +44 20 7585 2200
41 Buckmaster Road    m: +44 7770 465 077
London SW11 1EN, UK   w: www.russel.org.uk

On Fri, 2020-06-05 at 12:44 +1000, Manu via Digitalmars-d wrote: […]
> Back on-topic; I still use D because I just can't stand C++, and I somehow fundamentally believe D can 'get there'... but god is it a hard and frustrating road! Eternally so close, but always juuuust misses the mark. Maybe one day we'll land the shot >_<

For me writing GTK+ desktop applications, I'd rather use D than Rust or Vala (I do not actually use Vala at all as it is just too niche), but the developer experience with Rust is just so much nicer than using D. Writing Rust code is harder than writing the same functionality in D (except for asynchronous and futures based code, where Rust just wins over D hands down), but the D plugin to CLion and IntelliJ IDEA isn't anywhere near the capability of the Rust plugin. Writing all code with Emacs, Bash and lldb is just a terrible experience, despite the wonders of Emacs.

-- 
Russel.
===========================================
Dr Russel Winder      t: +44 20 7585 2200
41 Buckmaster Road    m: +44 7770 465 077
London SW11 1EN, UK   w: www.russel.org.uk