On Thursday, 24 October 2024 at 03:58:43 UTC, Manu wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Oct 2024 at 03:26, Chris Piker via Digitalmars-d < digitalmars-d@puremagic.com> wrote:
>
> The problem is that there is only one maintainer. He's not interested or
> motivated by funding in the past.
> In order for it to have a healthier existence, it needs more than one
> maintainer, and if another could be motivated with funding then that's
> something, but funding needs to be specifically directed to that person.
> There's no dlang foundation effort to try and find/fund maintainers for
> these essential projects.
>
> The interesting catch that I reckon we can see with Visual Studio, is that
> it's usually industry professionals that are using it, and as such they are
> less likely to have bandwidth away from their work to work on that. It's
> not an ecosystem that lends to hobbyists so much; the overlap in the venn
> diagram between VS users and dlang hobbyists is small.
> Ideally, a D company that uses VS should direct one of their staff to have
> some hours dedicated to tooling... but there aren't any such companies as
> I'm aware?

You are correct. If you're using all-up Visual Studio, you're paying for a yearly license, and these things aren't cheap (I have one, AMA). So if you're using one, you're probably very invested in the MSFT ecosystem. So I have, because at work I use SQL Server, Azure, and .NET Framework, in addition to .NET Core and Linux.

When you're that invested, you're probably content with C#/.NET.

Realistically, the vast majority of our users who are going to interested in LSP's and Debuggers are going to be on VS Code. I know there are many Emacs and VIM users as well, but for the specific purposes you're talking about the high-value impact is going to be working on VS Code support.

Is what it is. 🤷‍♂️

On Thursday, 24 October 2024 at 06:17:21 UTC, Adam Wilson wrote:
> On Thursday, 24 October 2024 at 03:58:43 UTC, Manu wrote:
>> On Tue, 22 Oct 2024 at 03:26, Chris Piker via Digitalmars-d < digitalmars-d@puremagic.com> wrote:
>>
>> The problem is that there is only one maintainer. He's not interested or
>> motivated by funding in the past.
>> In order for it to have a healthier existence, it needs more than one
>> maintainer, and if another could be motivated with funding then that's
>> something, but funding needs to be specifically directed to that person.
>> There's no dlang foundation effort to try and find/fund maintainers for
>> these essential projects.
>>
>> The interesting catch that I reckon we can see with Visual Studio, is that
>> it's usually industry professionals that are using it, and as such they are
>> less likely to have bandwidth away from their work to work on that. It's
>> not an ecosystem that lends to hobbyists so much; the overlap in the venn
>> diagram between VS users and dlang hobbyists is small.
>> Ideally, a D company that uses VS should direct one of their staff to have
>> some hours dedicated to tooling... but there aren't any such companies as
>> I'm aware?
>
> You are correct. If you're using all-up Visual Studio, you're paying for a yearly license, and these things aren't cheap (I have one, AMA). So if you're using one, you're probably very invested in the MSFT ecosystem. So I have, because at work I use SQL Server, Azure, and .NET Framework, in addition to .NET Core and Linux.
>
> When you're that invested, you're probably content with C#/.NET.
>
> Realistically, the vast majority of our users who are going to interested in LSP's and Debuggers are going to be on VS Code. I know there are many Emacs and VIM users as well, but for the specific purposes you're talking about the high-value impact is going to be working on VS Code support.
>
> Is what it is. 🤷‍♂️

Additionally, with the pressure of other language ecosystems, game industry adoption for tooling and scripting, and now goverments attention on safety regulations, C#/.NET has been steadly improved to the point D isn't really worth looking into, for companies already invested into .NET ecosystem.

Sure metaprogramming is much easier in D than the pain of dealing with Code Generators, but that is about it, AOT is now part of the picture, lots of improvements for low level systems like programming, SIMD support, and wide adoption among key players in the games industry, e.g. Devil May Cry for PS5 uses a CAPCOM in-house engine built on a fork from .NET Core.

And regardless of Walter's opinion on C++/CLI, it is pretty much alive among .NET developers that need to interop with C and C++ code on Windows, it even handles C++20 (minus modules).

On Fri, 25 Oct 2024 at 06:21, Chris Piker via Digitalmars-d < digitalmars-d@puremagic.com> wrote:

> On Thursday, 24 October 2024 at 06:17:21 UTC, Adam Wilson wrote:
>
> > You are correct. If you're using all-up Visual Studio, you're paying for a yearly license, and these things aren't cheap (I have one, AMA).
>
> Ah, didn't know that. Visual Studio is only $65/year for academic institutions.  Had no idea it was so expensive in the outside world.  I figured MS subsidized the cost to get more developers working on Windows.
>
>
There is Visual Studio Community Edition these days, which is free.
It used to be fairly feature reduced, but today it's basically
full-featured; I use Community Edition, and there's nothing at all missing
compared to the Enterprise version that I care about.
So, for all intents and purposes, VS is free (for non-commercial use).

On Sunday, 27 October 2024 at 00:57:02 UTC, monkyyy wrote:
> On Thursday, 24 October 2024 at 06:09:45 UTC, Adam Wilson wrote:
>> Gist's don't merge.
>
> Would you prefer an soac appication?

I guess, a PR would be something one could potentially merge.

On Sunday, 27 October 2024 at 01:03:52 UTC, Elias (0xEAB) wrote:
> On Sunday, 27 October 2024 at 00:57:02 UTC, monkyyy wrote:
>> On Thursday, 24 October 2024 at 06:09:45 UTC, Adam Wilson wrote:
>>> Gist's don't merge.
>>
>> Would you prefer an soac appication?
>
> I guess, a PR would be something one could potentially merge.

If I translated my "weak" concept to the official style guide and added giant wall of text "documenting" it(being verbose and unclear via overt unnecessary formality to match phoboes style) would odds of success would you expect?

On Sunday, 27 October 2024 at 01:25:58 UTC, monkyyy wrote:
> would odds of success would you expect?

Higher ones than in the case where there is no PR to merge in the first place.

On Sunday, 27 October 2024 at 01:57:28 UTC, Elias (0xEAB) wrote:
> On Sunday, 27 October 2024 at 01:25:58 UTC, monkyyy wrote:
>> would odds of success would you expect?
>
> Higher ones than in the case where there is no PR to merge in the first place.

Invalid format please pick a number between 0-100