All,

After observing discussions in this news group I have noticed that much of the traffic is related to feature requests of one sort or another.  Is there a place where they are listed?  I think that this is a good forum for vetting proposed features, however old discussions get pushed to the bottom of the heap fairly rapidly.

Admittedly some ideas are good, some are not.  It would be nice if there was a place (wiki??) for the feature requests to be posted after they have been vetted here and have some support.  Of course the compiler writers have veto power over any feature request (as it should be).  This would be a good way to give some of the desired features some permanence.

Your thoughts please?

Mark.

On Tue, 02 Dec 2003 22:11:30 -0500, Mark Brudnak wrote:

> All,
> 
> Is there  a place where they are listed?

I'll give this 3 days.
Some guys will say it's a good idea.
Some will come up with suggestions for the implementation.
Walter will say nothing.
and in 3 days will be forgotten.

I suggested this before, that's what happend.

I think the best suggestion back then was to create
a bugzilla entry (or thread or...).

but if Walter doesn't say "good idea, where is it?"
this it's good for nothing.

(Last time around we were diverted from an implementation
by the then promissed big D repository site.
In 36 minutes I'm gona declare Benji lost for the
D community and ask for suggestion where to park my applications.)

good luck, I still like the bugzilla idea.

Ant

Yea unfortunately thats exactly how it seems to  be, ill find a place to park it if someone can do the basic PHP ( or D ? ) / HTML for it.  Linux OS.

C

"Ant" <duitoolkit@yahoo.ca> wrote in message news:pan.2003.12.03.03.27.25.290200@yahoo.ca...
> On Tue, 02 Dec 2003 22:11:30 -0500, Mark Brudnak wrote:
>
> > All,
> >
> > Is there  a place where they are listed?
>
> I'll give this 3 days.
> Some guys will say it's a good idea.
> Some will come up with suggestions for the implementation.
> Walter will say nothing.
> and in 3 days will be forgotten.
>
> I suggested this before, that's what happend.
>
> I think the best suggestion back then was to create
> a bugzilla entry (or thread or...).
>
> but if Walter doesn't say "good idea, where is it?"
> this it's good for nothing.
>
> (Last time around we were diverted from an implementation
> by the then promissed big D repository site.
> In 36 minutes I'm gona declare Benji lost for the
> D community and ask for suggestion where to park my applications.)
>
> good luck, I still like the bugzilla idea.
>
> Ant
>

In article <bqjjm3$tb0$1@digitaldaemon.com>, Mark Brudnak says...
>
>All,
>
>After observing discussions in this news group I have noticed that much of the traffic is related to feature requests of one sort or another.  Is there a place where they are listed?  I think that this is a good forum for vetting proposed features, however old discussions get pushed to the bottom of the heap fairly rapidly.
>
>Admittedly some ideas are good, some are not.  It would be nice if there was a place (wiki??) for the feature requests to be posted after they have been vetted here and have some support.  Of course the compiler writers have veto power over any feature request (as it should be).  This would be a good way to give some of the desired features some permanence.
>
>Your thoughts please?
>
>Mark.
>
>

In article <bqjjm3$tb0$1@digitaldaemon.com>, Mark Brudnak says...
>
>All,
>
>After observing discussions in this news group I have noticed that much of the traffic is related to feature requests of one sort or another.  Is there a place where they are listed?  I think that this is a good forum for vetting proposed features, however old discussions get pushed to the bottom of the heap fairly rapidly.
>
>Admittedly some ideas are good, some are not.  It would be nice if there was a place (wiki??) for the feature requests to be posted after they have been vetted here and have some support.

I've been thinking about the same problem. As it is, the less controversial
things tend to drown under those that make a heated discussion, which
obviously is wrong -- the amount of shouting is never equivalent with
the importance of the issue.

A "list on the wall" would help enormously. We might also have some
explanation next to the ideas we've discarded, so that these ideas
wouldn't pop up again a month after they've been buried. Some might
even explicitly be tagged as "not now, but definitely later", or
"this is unanimously considered a good idea but nobody could
implement it right now", or "this will never be, period" etc.
We might even have inofficial referendums and stuff.

More broadly, I expect the volume here to increase, and the need for additional medias for our communication is on the rise. A wiki would add a lot of good for us. Permanent displays of example code, various doc pages, faq, gotchas, -- and above all, a place where more elaborate or lengthy opinions could be posted for review.

This would not necessarily drown Walter. Most of the content (or chaff, if you will) would be generated by us anyhow. Also, I'd think that giving some kind of Semi Official Status to one of the existing D wikis could be just as good.

Georg Wrede wrote:

> In article <bqjjm3$tb0$1@digitaldaemon.com>, Mark Brudnak says...
> 
>>All,
>>
>>After observing discussions in this news group I have noticed that much of
>>the traffic is related to feature requests of one sort or another.  Is there
>>a place where they are listed?  I think that this is a good forum for
>>vetting proposed features, however old discussions get pushed to the bottom
>>of the heap fairly rapidly.
>>
>>Admittedly some ideas are good, some are not.  It would be nice if there was
>>a place (wiki??) for the feature requests to be posted after they have been
>>vetted here and have some support.
> 
> 
> I've been thinking about the same problem. As it is, the less controversial
> things tend to drown under those that make a heated discussion, which obviously is wrong -- the amount of shouting is never equivalent with
> the importance of the issue.
> 
> A "list on the wall" would help enormously. We might also have some
> explanation next to the ideas we've discarded, so that these ideas
> wouldn't pop up again a month after they've been buried. Some might even explicitly be tagged as "not now, but definitely later", or "this is unanimously considered a good idea but nobody could implement it right now", or "this will never be, period" etc.
> We might even have inofficial referendums and stuff.
> 
> More broadly, I expect the volume here to increase, and the need for
> additional medias for our communication is on the rise. A wiki would add a lot of good for us. Permanent displays of example code, various doc pages, faq, gotchas, -- and above all, a place where
> more elaborate or lengthy opinions could be posted for review.
> 
> This would not necessarily drown Walter. Most of the content (or
> chaff, if you will) would be generated by us anyhow. Also, I'd
> think that giving some kind of Semi Official Status to one of
> the existing D wikis could be just as good.

For your information...

There are currently two wikis for D.

Helmut Leitner's Wiki4D, http://www.wikiservice.at/wiki4d/wiki.cgi
Dan Liebgold's DWiki, http://dlanguage.netunify.com/

Wiki4D is the de facto "Semi-Official" wiki.  I've found it to be easier to use than DWiki, and recently the server for DWiki has apparently been down for days at a time.  Even when DWiki's server was more reliable it had less content and a lot less editing occurring. (Months would go by between edits, where Wiki4D is generally edited each week).

The only discussions already started at Wiki4D are Best Practices (http://www.wikiservice.at/d/wiki.cgi?BestPractices) and Boolean != Bit (http://www.wikiservice.at/d/wiki.cgi?BooleanNotEquBit), but others can easily be added by anyone who wants to make it easier to find their arguments in the future.

Justin

>> This would not necessarily drown Walter. Most of the content (or chaff, if you will) would be generated by us anyhow. Also, I'd think that giving some kind of Semi Official Status to one of the existing D wikis could be just as good.

Instead of describing a proposal I just went to wiki4d and
added a new page.
If it's very bad please just add a comment there don't
delete it immidiatly has it might be a starting point
for something better. If after a couple of days
the only comments are "arrg! delete this" then we will delete it.

Ant

On Wed, 03 Dec 2003 17:34:35 +0000, Ant wrote:

> 
>>> This would not necessarily drown Walter. Most of the content (or chaff, if you will) would be generated by us anyhow. Also, I'd think that giving some kind of Semi Official Status to one of the existing D wikis could be just as good.
> 
> Instead of describing a proposal I just went to wiki4d and added a new page.

The page is at http://www.prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?FeatureRequestList

Someone corrected and added to my original version (for better) but for the last couple of days seems to be stable.

So, go there and add your feature requests.

Ant

I fussed with the format a little bit.  I added columns for Pros and Cons as lifted from the discussions.  I posted an example "UNICODE operators" for your comment.

Mark.

"Ant" <duitoolkit@yahoo.ca> wrote > >
> > Instead of describing a proposal I just went to wiki4d and added a new page.
>
> The page is at http://www.prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?FeatureRequestList
>
> Someone corrected and added to my original version (for better) but for the last couple of days seems to be stable.
>
> So, go there and add your feature requests.
>
> Ant

In article <br3eic$mnn$1@digitaldaemon.com>, Mark Brudnak says...
>
>I fussed with the format a little bit.  I added columns for Pros and Cons as lifted from the discussions.  I posted an example "UNICODE operators" for your comment.
>
>Mark.

I don't like it. It's like adding the discussion there.
The discussion is here. The list should only enumerate the ideas
that were made public.
Lets leave both version, maybe some one finds a way to merge them.

Now that the page location was announced
>> http://www.prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?FeatureRequestList
we could add a seccion on the bottom of that page and continue this discussion there.

To keep the page going someone will have to add the requests from
here. Until the list somehow becomes compreensive people will not
pay attenction to it.
(I don't think this is going to take off but at least we are trying)

Ant