On 12/15/11 11:44 AM, Mattbeui wrote:
> I am C programmer, but I had already did a little OO programming in
> Python and Delphi. So after look for a growth in my studies and enter
> definetly in OO programming, I found a video on youtube from Andrei
> Alexandrescu. And I got hooked since then.
>
> But that was just the beginning, until I discover that there are D1 and
> D2, tango and phobos Et cetera. Many options to get lost.
>
> I've had a great help from the d-guys at #d channel on IRC. But
> anyway... I think choosing one language is the right choice for
> everyone, mainly for the new users. And you need simplify the entry of
> the new users.
>
> In some cases you need sacrifice something. For example, I love work on
> Visual Studio 7.0 (The old one without framework or ..net), but they
> (irc guys) told me that I need move on to the free version of VS 2010 to
> use VisualD. Yes for me as new member this is a small sacrifice, but for
> you, the D1 guys, you should think for the benefits of D2 for all
> community, and not for what you will lost but what you will get from now
> on.
>
> PS: Sorry my bad english.
>
> Matt.

I quote all this post because I so strongly agree with it.

Lately Walter and I have been increasingly thinking about the steps we need to take to improve adoption of D. Things have improved dramatically on the technical front, and we think going forward implementation quality and library coverage must remain the most important focus points.

However, without a comprehensive PR strategy we risk at being all dressed up and nowhere to go. It's particularly important to work on it now, not later, because such things take months and years to catch on.

The reason for the recent move, which Matt pointed very well, has to do with brand specialization. Years ago I've read a book recommended by a successful entrepreneur: "The 22 immutable laws of branding". By utter coincidence Walter mentioned he's reading it right now (which gives a good insight into our preoccupation).

That book has quite a few interesting and somewhat non-intuitive notions (see e.g. a slide deck at http://www.slideshare.net/sjhus/22-immutable-laws-of-branding). Among these was "the law of contraction", the idea that a brand gets stronger as you narrow its focus. The book gives good examples: Starbucks specializing on coffee when one could find coffee virtually on every block in Seattle; FedEx competing with subsidized postal office but specializing in overnight delivery; Colgate winning the "toothpaste war" of the 70s with fewer, not more, offerings than Procter & Gamble; and more.

We need to contract D's brand. People who consider D need to contemplate one crisp and coherent offer.


Andrei

On 12/15/2011 4:18 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> People who consider D need to contemplate one
> crisp and coherent offer.

Right. And we make D2 work or we fail completely.

On Thu, 15 Dec 2011 17:52:48 -0600
Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail@erdani.org> wrote:

> It is reasonable to expect that people with an interest in D have had all chances to see it and sufficient channels to chime in.

Sure. It is unreasonable that someone should knock on every D1 user out here, asking about their opinion.

The project is open-source, there are no paying customers buying D1 support, so pls. move and spare (electronic) ink.

I'm not favoring democracy, but competency...Let those who know better decide and let me do that what I can the best.


Sincerely,
Gour


-- 
Never was there a time when I did not exist, nor you, nor all these kings; nor in the future shall any of us cease to be.

http://atmarama.net | Hlapicina (Croatia) | GPG: 52B5C810

On Thu, 15 Dec 2011 16:42:26 -0800
Walter Bright <newshound2@digitalmars.com> wrote:

> Right. And we make D2 work or we fail completely.

Please, make it work!



Sincerely,
Gour


-- 
As a strong wind sweeps away a boat on the water, even one of the roaming senses on which the mind focuses can carry away a man's intelligence.

http://atmarama.net | Hlapicina (Croatia) | GPG: 52B5C810

On Thu, 15 Dec 2011 18:18:24 -0600
Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail@erdani.org> wrote:

> We need to contract D's brand. People who consider D need to contemplate one crisp and coherent offer.

Mine would be to write general-purpose multi-platform GUI application, but it seems it's dependant on other offerings.

Moreover, I'll help/work on some GUI bindings and build-tool support (either/both pushing Cmake & premake upstream).


Sincerely,
Gour


-- 
But a person free from all attachment and aversion and able to control his senses through regulative principles of freedom can obtain the complete mercy of the Lord.

http://atmarama.net | Hlapicina (Croatia) | GPG: 52B5C810

On 12/15/2011 11:04 PM, Gour wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Dec 2011 16:42:26 -0800
> Walter Bright<newshound2@digitalmars.com>  wrote:
>
>> Right. And we make D2 work or we fail completely.
>
> Please, make it work!

I have every intention to!

On Thursday, 15 December 2011 at 20:42:26 UTC, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
> On 2011-12-15 20:41, Walter Bright wrote:
>> On 12/15/2011 9:49 AM, Robert Clipsham wrote:
>>> * Do it all in one go, and DO NOT GET DISTRACTED. The moment you start
>>> trying to
>>> clean up code as well as finish porting it you introduce lots of issues
>>
>> I've done many projects that translated code from one language to
>> another, some were pretty large. The One Big Most Important Rule is:
>>
>>
>> !!!! DO NOT REFACTOR/ENHANCE/IMPROVE/FIX/CLEANUP THE CODE WHILE
>> TRANSLATING !!!!
>>
>>
>> I know how tempting it is. It's incredibly tempting. It's a huge mistake.
>>
>> The method that works is to turn your brain off, and simply translate.
>> Strive for a 1:1 correspondence between the original code and the
>> translated code. Do not divert from this until after your translation is
>> done, and it behaves identically to the original.
>>
>> The reason is that the translated version inevitably will not behave
>> like the original. A lot of things will be broken. If you did a 1:1
>> translation, you can instrument both, find where the translation
>> diverges, and fix it in a fairly quick and straightforward manner. If
>> you changed the way it is organized or works, then you have no idea if
>> it is a translation error or your changes broke it, and you have a much,
>> much harder time fixing it.
>
> Having ported the Mac OS X version of SWT from Java to D (and a couple of other code bases) I completely agree with everything above. You just have to turn your mind off and work like a machine when porting. It's extremely tempting do some small fixes here and there but restrain yourself, you'll thank yourself in the end.

Thanks for the tips!

Cheers, Jakob.