I'm not taking a side on this question but "Do we, or do we not WANT lots of users of D before it goes 1.0?"

This is a request for comment.

pros:
--The sooner we get more users the sooner it can go mainstream.
--More users = more testers / critics / experiment / etc.
...

cons:
--The more D code that is written, the harder it becomes to change the spec.
--If something major has to be changed and as a result, axes a major project, this would adversely effect the "image" of the language.
...

BCS wrote:


> I'm not taking a side on this question but "Do we, or do we not WANT lots of users of D before it goes 1.0?"

When is that ?

The D spec was conceived in Dec 1999. That's 6 years ago.
The first DMD alpha was released in Dec 2001, 4 years ago.

So if I do find someone that would be willing to try D,
should tell them to wait "a little longer" while the
language specification and reference compiler is being
worked on ? Or should I ask them to help out meanwhile ?

I don't know about you, but I prefer the collaborative
approach and try to help out with the open parts of it...


> pros:
> --The sooner we get more users the sooner it can go mainstream.

For it to go "mainstream", it just needs marketing. Maybe support ?

> --More users = more testers / critics / experiment / etc.

This is both good and bad of course, especially the critics... ;-)

> cons:
> --The more D code that is written, the harder it becomes to change the spec.

IMHO, this has already happened... As D seems to be pretty fixed ?

> --If something major has to be changed and as a result, axes a major project, this would adversely effect the "image" of the language.

Maybe one should just draw a line in the sand and call it "1.0",
and fix the shortcomings in "the first service pack" thereafter.

Seems to be working for other companies and languages ? (eg Java)
And if it wen't final sooner, it would save me from doing C++...

--anders

"Anders F Björklund" <afb@algonet.se> wrote in message news:dnn82k$1qtu$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> Maybe one should just draw a line in the sand and call it "1.0", and fix the shortcomings in "the first service pack" thereafter.

That's my feeling, as well.

Anders F Björklund wrote:
> BCS wrote:
> 
> 
>> I'm not taking a side on this question but "Do we, or do we not WANT lots of users of D before it goes 1.0?"
> 
> 
> When is that ?
> 
> The D spec was conceived in Dec 1999. That's 6 years ago.
> The first DMD alpha was released in Dec 2001, 4 years ago.
> 
> So if I do find someone that would be willing to try D,
> should tell them to wait "a little longer" while the
> language specification and reference compiler is being
> worked on ? Or should I ask them to help out meanwhile ?
> 
> I don't know about you, but I prefer the collaborative
> approach and try to help out with the open parts of it...
> 
> 
[...]
> 
> --anders


No, we shouldn't turn any one away, but should we ACTIVELY seek out users quite yet?

In article <dnm6pb$lps$1@digitaldaemon.com>, Walter Bright says...
>
>
>"Don Clugston" <dac@nospam.com.au> wrote in message news:dnm162$gni$1@digitaldaemon.com...
>> I'll also update my delegate/member function pointer article on CodeProject and put a big reference to D at the end of it. Since it seems to have been the most popular programming article of 2004 (the web page is now approaching 200 000 hits), it might direct a few people here.
>
>Thanks!
>
>> I don't think D needs any marketing. It just needs more visibility. No one will use it if they've never heard of it.
>
>It's my experience that most programmers won't look at D the first time they run across it, or the second time, or the tenth time. But seeing reference to it constantly eventually convinces people that it is real, and worth looking at.

I got here when some day I wondered, isn't there any other language compiled to native assembler other than C/C++ (without taking in account some others that I don't like so much, like Pascal)?? Is it possible that we could have been stucked in time with the same old languages forever? Isn't anyone correcting the horrors of C++ or enhancing it?.

So I started to google for other languages (imperative ones of course) and I found D and it attracted me from the first time. When I first read the specs and presentation, I couldn't believe that *at last* someone did what I've dreamed for a long time (not so long since I am 24). D is (the more every day) what I've wished of a true compiled-language. Just like my precious C++ but much much more nicer. I think I'll cry :')

Then when I saw a compiler that works so well like DMD I thought that it couldn't be real and that it couldn't be possible that this D wasn't famous enough yet! I still can't believe the opinions of other guys that will die with C++ because they think it can resolve anything (I don't believe the work it takes to make STL streams and strings work with UNICODE. That really stinks!).

That's why I promote D so much in the academic and work fields in which I live (CS in UBA - Buenos Aires University and Economics Department of Argentina, Informatics Project). Among my colleagues and work bodies (which are the most the same people), everyone knows that if they hear about D they'll remember me and my insane obsession :D

I'm just expecting D becomes mature enough to be used in a serious project (and a real and mature IDE that could make D coding a complete pleasure, I know this is rather a secondary issue). Also I can't deny the fact that each day I learn so much from the people of the NG and that I want to help hurrying this whole maturing process.

Thanks to everybody (specially to the one with the courage to make my dream
possible, Walter)... I'm going to cry :')... :P

Tom
PS: I'll keep promoting D among my people till the end!

BCS wrote:

> No, we shouldn't turn any one away, but should we
> ACTIVELY seek out users quite yet?

I would love it for the D language specification to be
released in a manner suitable for "standardization"...

But beyond that and a book or two, plus some pet peeves,
I don't have much hesitation recommending it to people ?

Not that they move from C++ or Objective-C, the ingrates,
but anyway. ;-)

--anders


PS:
Now, if only I had the 80,000 lines of C headers that is the
"Carbon" framework translated, I could write some Mac apps...

See http://developer.apple.com/carbon/ and
http://dsource.org/projects/carbonheaders/

Tom wrote:
> 
> That's why I promote D so much in the academic and work fields in which I live
> (CS in UBA - Buenos Aires University and Economics Department of Argentina,
> Informatics Project). Among my colleagues and work bodies (which are the most
> the same people), everyone knows that if they hear about D they'll remember me
> and my insane obsession :D 

Personally, I think D would be an ideal teaching language.  It has a fairly low barrier for entry with garbage collection as the default allocation method, and it allows the programmer to "drill down" to whatever level of behavior he desires.  By contrast, Java only allows relatively high-level interaction while C++ does a fairly bad job of hiding nuanced implementation issues that a student may not be ready for.  If I ever end up teaching procedural programming, there's little question about which language I'll employ.


Sean

Anders F Björklund wrote:
> BCS wrote:
> 
>> No, we shouldn't turn any one away, but should we
>> ACTIVELY seek out users quite yet?
> 
> I would love it for the D language specification to be
> released in a manner suitable for "standardization"...
> 
> But beyond that and a book or two, plus some pet peeves,
> I don't have much hesitation recommending it to people ?

Same here.  Actually, I already recommend D to people--either they'll like the design philosophy or they won't.


Sean

Walter Bright wrote:
> "Anders F Björklund" <afb@algonet.se> wrote in message
> news:dnn82k$1qtu$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> 
>>Maybe one should just draw a line in the sand and call it "1.0",
>>and fix the shortcomings in "the first service pack" thereafter.
> 
> 
> That's my feeling, as well.
> 
> 

Christmas/New years gift? : ) I wouldn't mind D going 1.0 either, but I understand that it will offend a lot of people, just look what happened with the 'D user poll' thread I made where for the most part everyone said no to 1.0, naturally most D users are nothing short of perfectionists.

You should at least get the opinions of the newsgroup first, lest you alienate any contributers.

And please keep a seperate 1.0 and 2.0 compiler branch, only adding new features to the experimental D 2.0, and bug fixes for 1.0. That way we have a very stable compiler and development platform for big projects, as new features tend to introduce bugs and break things.

My $.02

"Anders F Björklund" <afb@algonet.se> wrote in message news:dnn82k$1qtu$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> BCS wrote:
>
>
>> I'm not taking a side on this question but "Do we, or do we not WANT lots of users of D before it goes 1.0?"
>
> When is that ?
>
> The D spec was conceived in Dec 1999. That's 6 years ago. The first DMD alpha was released in Dec 2001, 4 years ago.
>

I know and understand what you're getting at, but the timeframe is about par with how much time it took for other languages to start taking hold too, perhaps even less compared to C++ and Java. Of course, now we are dealing with 'internet time' when it comes to anything new in IT (and we wonder why there is so much crap out there <g>).

What D has done in four years is remarkable when you consider how much was done by one person mostly on free time. C++ had a lot of help from what was then probably the premier CS research organization in the world, and Java had a large and rapidly growing tech. giant behind it.

(I'm not forgetting the major contributions of others here, but no one can argue who's done the great majority of the work)

> So if I do find someone that would be willing to try D, should tell them to wait "a little longer" while the language specification and reference compiler is being worked on ? Or should I ask them to help out meanwhile ?

I'm telling people all of the time about D, but I do add the caveat that it's 'young' yet, *but* that's usually right before I also add that the language, tools and library are pretty stable, and are great for writing utlities where script just doesn't cut it. The primary problem is that A) I work for clients who drink the Microsoft koolaid or B) work for clients using proprietary Unix systems and tools.

>> --If something major has to be changed and as a result, axes a major project, this would adversely effect the "image" of the language.
>
> Maybe one should just draw a line in the sand and call it "1.0", and fix the shortcomings in "the first service pack" thereafter.
>

I've got to ask myself "Is the language ready for 1.0, and would this really help the language grow right now?". I'm not sure, but I'm leaning towards "yes" for the first part and "no" for the 2nd at this point. And there's no turning back from the big v1.0 release, being that "1.0" seems to carry so much weight with people regarding what decisions are made for a progamming language from that point on.

That said, I'm often wrong in such matters otherwise I wouldn't be here, but in Bermuda or somewhere warm sipping a beer on the beach. I just had to add my $0.02 worth for consideration <g>