I only like to born my ideal language, now the D is the most near but lack
vaerious capabilitities, a special implementation of threats ( Sthreats )
for eterogenius programing, one Sthreat can only comunicate to other via
monodirectionals buffers, calls and signals.
we create a buffer and it only can be modified by only the Sthreat on it is
declared as output and read by the Sthreat on its is declared as receptor(
example, we have a Sthreat for the gui an the other for the main , we
decared a OpenGL buffer, its can be only modified by the main but the gui
can be acces to it for screeninhg it).
a Sthreat can be call a fuction in other Sthreat.
a Sthreat can send a signal to other Sthreat like a soft interruption.
a Sthreat can start or stop any other Sthreat but can't repeated Sthreats in
the same program.
a Sthreat is a dinamic code and it have funtions to make it extensible(like
plug ings but in reality are xtension of the code, wen we ad a external code
the program nad its is only on file but it can modifie various Sthreats) or
fixed.
4 Sthreats = 4 threats
4 threats <= Sthreats
their declaration are easy using a Sthreat in the start of the main fuction
of the Sthreat and this function are declared in a declaration Sthreats file
in a latent or cative initial state.
A similar to html language extension for make a mode of easy programing a
gui but only can be used in on of the runing Sthreat, this can be compatible
with other gui interfaces and extensible.
...
sorry for my bad english

"Damon Gray" wrote...
> Good idea!
>
> I would definitely vote for it if I could. What is also nice about getting it into "The big eight" is that it will be indexed and searchable via "groups.google.com". This will make the spam problem negligible because results will be searched for not browsed. I would start the process as soon as possible. If it doesn't work out
digtalmars
> can put there news server into the larger usenet feed and then it
can be
> added into google.
>

If you can't make it into the Big-8, then you can of course create it
in Alt.
But I would say having it inside the Big-8 would be a lot better in
promoting the language to the programming community as a whole...

KTC
-- 
Experience is a good school but the fees are high.
    - Heinrich Heine

"KTC" <me@here.com> wrote in message news:bti7kk$bp7$1@digitaldaemon.com...
>
> "Damon Gray" wrote...
> > Good idea!
> >
> > I would definitely vote for it if I could. What is also nice about getting it into "The big eight" is that it will be indexed and searchable via "groups.google.com". This will make the spam problem negligible because results will be searched for not browsed. I would start the process as soon as possible. If it doesn't work out
> digtalmars
> > can put there news server into the larger usenet feed and then it
> can be
> > added into google.
> >
>
> If you can't make it into the Big-8, then you can of course create it
> in Alt.
> But I would say having it inside the Big-8 would be a lot better in
> promoting the language to the programming community as a whole...

I would say the whole thing or nothing. I wouldn't vote for it to go into alt, if it doesn't get in the Big-9

In article <3FFC641C.5030704@go.away.mr.bad.spammer.net>, Damon Gray says...
>
>Good idea!
>
>I would definitely vote for it if I could. What is also nice about getting it into "The big eight" is that it will be indexed and searchable via "groups.google.com". This will make the spam problem negligible because results will be searched for not browsed. I would start the process as soon as possible. If it doesn't work out digtalmars can put there news server into the larger usenet feed and then it can be added into google.

I tried to found out how but was given a catch-22 instead.

"Matthew" wrote...
>
> I would say the whole thing or nothing. I wouldn't vote for it to go
into
> alt, if it doesn't get in the Big-9
>

One don't actually have to vote for the creation of an Alt. group. But then I do agree with you that either in comp.lang.* or nothing...

got my vote :).

C
"Marco A" <Marco_member@pathlink.com> wrote in message
news:btfkfk$2bs2$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> Would people be interested in creating a comp.lang.d usenet group to approximately correspond with the 1.0 release?
>
> The process is a little involved, so I won't do it unless a majority of
people
> here are in support and will in turn vote for it on the usenet. This
potenially
> would allow a larger audience and make things easier to seach for. The
down-side
> is group spam. I was thinking that the general D language could be
discussed in
> comp.lang.d and DMD compiler issues would remain in this group.
>
> http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/faqs/big-eight.html
>
> Marco
>
>
> In article <bt0vff$17ev$1@digitaldaemon.com>, Walter says...
> >
> >
> >"Mark T" <Mark_member@pathlink.com> wrote in message news:bsvo4b$2ilg$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> >> I really only have 1
> >>
> >> 1) That the D language version 1.0 is finalized and released in 2004.
The
> >window
> >> of opportunity closes a little each year for getting a new language off
> >the
> >> ground and adopted by a decent sized developer community so it doesn't
die
> >a
> >> premature death.  I can't use it at work unless it becomes popular.
> >
> >I think it's pretty close. I'm finishing up what I hope will be the last
bit
> >of new features, and then it'll be bug fixing. D 1.0 will probably be the most powerful 1.0 language ever released!
> >
> >
>
>

Marco A wrote:

>Would people be interested in creating a comp.lang.d usenet group to
>approximately correspond with the 1.0 release?
>
>The process is a little involved, so I won't do it unless a majority of people
>here are in support and will in turn vote for it on the usenet. This potenially
>would allow a larger audience and make things easier to seach for. The down-side
>is group spam. I was thinking that the general D language could be discussed in
>comp.lang.d and DMD compiler issues would remain in this group.
>
>http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/faqs/big-eight.html
>
>Marco
>
>  
>
Of course you'd have my vote, but do we really have 100 active readers in this group?
I wonder if any of the die hard C fans would vote against?

J Anderson wrote:

> Marco A wrote:
> 
>> Would people be interested in creating a comp.lang.d usenet group to
>> approximately correspond with the 1.0 release?
>>
>> The process is a little involved, so I won't do it unless a majority of people
>> here are in support and will in turn vote for it on the usenet. This potenially
>> would allow a larger audience and make things easier to seach for. The down-side
>> is group spam. I was thinking that the general D language could be discussed in
>> comp.lang.d and DMD compiler issues would remain in this group.
>>
>> http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/faqs/big-eight.html
>>
>> Marco
>>
>>  
>>
> Of course you'd have my vote, but do we really have 100 active readers in this group?
I'd definitely vote for this as well.

Walter would have a better idea than most of us since he can count how many download occur when a new version is released.  (Of course I hope he factors in that some people might download the same release multiple times to put on different computers.)

I'm confident that there are many people the are fans of D (and would be inclined to support D with a vote) that simply aren't inclined to post many messages here.

> I wonder if any of the die hard C fans would vote against?
> 
I followed the link from Marco's original post and looked at the FAQ. Then I subscribed to news:news.announce.newgroups and reading the posts sheds a little light about voting process on recent proposals:

Date       Group                 Yes   No  A I
2003/11/25 misc.invest.bonds      52   12  3 1 (failed)
2003/11/25 misc.metric-system    211   25  6 3 (passed)
2003/12/09 news.admin.parliament  23   98  8 3 (failed)
2003/12/15 comp.databases.etl     41   13  3 2 (failed)

"A" is abstaining and "I" is invalid.

It's a small sample, so you shouldn't give much weight to my musings, but I do want to make some guess about how this might work for D

The parliament group idea looked like it might have annoyed some people, so I don't think we would expect 98 votes against a D group.  I'd guess that 10-25 people might vote against (but of course everyone should welcome a D group).

-- 
Justin
http://jcc_7.tripod.com/d/

> J Anderson wrote:
>
> > Marco A wrote:
> >
> >> Would people be interested in creating a comp.lang.d usenet group to approximately correspond with the 1.0 release?
> >>
> >> The process is a little involved, so I won't do it unless a majority
> >> of people
> >> here are in support and will in turn vote for it on the usenet. This
> >> potenially
> >> would allow a larger audience and make things easier to seach for. The
> >> down-side
> >> is group spam. I was thinking that the general D language could be
> >> discussed in
> >> comp.lang.d and DMD compiler issues would remain in this group.
> >>
> >> http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/faqs/big-eight.html
> >>
> >> Marco
> >>
> >>
> >>
> > Of course you'd have my vote, but do we really have 100 active readers in this group?
> I'd definitely vote for this as well.
>
> Walter would have a better idea than most of us since he can count how many download occur when a new version is released.  (Of course I hope he factors in that some people might download the same release multiple times to put on different computers.)
>
> I'm confident that there are many people the are fans of D (and would be inclined to support D with a vote) that simply aren't inclined to post many messages here.
>
> > I wonder if any of the die hard C fans would vote against?
> >
> I followed the link from Marco's original post and looked at the FAQ. Then I subscribed to news:news.announce.newgroups and reading the posts sheds a little light about voting process on recent proposals:
>
> Date       Group                 Yes   No  A I
> 2003/11/25 misc.invest.bonds      52   12  3 1 (failed)
> 2003/11/25 misc.metric-system    211   25  6 3 (passed)
> 2003/12/09 news.admin.parliament  23   98  8 3 (failed)
> 2003/12/15 comp.databases.etl     41   13  3 2 (failed)
>
> "A" is abstaining and "I" is invalid.
>
> It's a small sample, so you shouldn't give much weight to my musings, but I do want to make some guess about how this might work for D
>
> The parliament group idea looked like it might have annoyed some people, so I don't think we would expect 98 votes against a D group.  I'd guess that 10-25 people might vote against (but of course everyone should welcome a D group).

I hope you're right, but it seems optimistic to me. Judging from the amount of heat Walter was copping a couple of months ago on c.l.c.m, there'd be quite a few Nos on D.

I think we'd need a well coordinated countdown on the D NG, so that everyone who's inclined would not forget to add their vote.

In article <bt0vff$17ev$1@digitaldaemon.com>, Walter says...
>"Mark T" <Mark_member@pathlink.com> wrote in message
>> I really only have 1
>> 1) That the D language version 1.0 is finalized and released in 2004.
>I think it's pretty close. I'm finishing up what I hope will be the last bit of new features, and then it'll be bug fixing. D 1.0 will probably be the most powerful 1.0 language ever released!

I think that the notion about the closing window is valid. We might not see today what all will contribute to closing the window, but "just because I'm paranoid, doesn't mean they're not out to get us".

I also agree on that this just might be one of the most powerful 1.0 language releases ever!

However, I had a dream the other week about walking the halls of the
KDE development team. (As if they'd have a building of their own.)
I tried to convince them to switch to D. The counter argument was that
they'd never switch to a language where the specs are alive. They just
couldn't afford it.

So, should we make a promise to keep the March specs, until at least December?

We could have a separate track where we do development and debugging, or we could have a Linux like scheme were only the even releases are for users.

Actually, what is _really_ important is to have a fixed spec around March. Whether the compiler is perfectly debugged or completely up to the spec is of secondary importance. That can always be fixed during the summer. But a _really solid_ spec is what we should publish in March.