On 9/8/13 3:04, Walter Bright wrote:
> Recent threads here have made it pretty clear that VisualD is a critical
> piece of D infrastructure. (VisualD integrated D usage into Microsoft
> Visual Studio.)
>
> Andrei, myself and Rainer (VisualD's champion) are all in agreement on
> this.
>
> What do you think?

Oh, yes!

Not only is VisualD the best D IDE [on Windows], but it has crucial pieces of software in it. Check out its C++ to D conversion tools!

L.

On Saturday, September 07, 2013 12:04:51 Walter Bright wrote:
> Recent threads here have made it pretty clear that VisualD is a critical piece of D infrastructure. (VisualD integrated D usage into Microsoft Visual Studio.)
> 
> Andrei, myself and Rainer (VisualD's champion) are all in agreement on this.
> 
> What do you think?

I have no problem with it, though since I'm not likely to ever use it or contribute to it, I'm not sure that I particularly care one way or the other. I have no problem with people using IDEs and they can be nice, but I'm always a bit stumped by how important many people think they are and how they don't seem to think that they can function without them.

But if we think that moving VisualD into github/d-programming-language will help D, then it seems like a sensible enough move.

- Jonathan M Davis

On Saturday, 7 September 2013 at 22:38:44 UTC, Joseph Rushton Wakeling wrote:
> On 07/09/13 21:04, Walter Bright wrote:
>> Recent threads here have made it pretty clear that VisualD is a critical piece
>> of D infrastructure. (VisualD integrated D usage into Microsoft Visual Studio.)
>>
>> Andrei, myself and Rainer (VisualD's champion) are all in agreement on this.
>>
>> What do you think?
>
> Yes, absolutely.  Visual Studio is one of the most important software development tools out there and having a seamless D experience with it will be a great asset.  VisualD should definitely be given this kind of endorsement and focus.

Right on target. If D wants to achieve some level of visibility for Windows C++ developers, Visual Studio presence is crucial. We are talking about a huge chunk of market share here!

Disclosure: I have to use Visual Studio in work for my clients.

On Saturday, 7 September 2013 at 23:31:20 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
> On 9/7/2013 4:22 PM, Flamaros wrote:
>> I hope to see MonoD on github/d-programming-language too if it's the case of
>> VisualD.
>
> MonoD is definitely a contender for that. But let's take a moment to digest VisualD before we overreach!

Mono-D is an amazing piece of software, with a first-class parser and suggestion engine.
But the most valuable part of the project is Alexander Bothe, a tireless enhancer of the product and a person very responsive to user problems that may arise now and then...

Strongly advised

- Paolo Invernizzi

On Sunday, 8 September 2013 at 01:53:02 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> I have no problem with it, though since I'm not likely to ever use it or
> contribute to it, I'm not sure that I particularly care one way or the other.
> I have no problem with people using IDEs and they can be nice, but I'm always
> a bit stumped by how important many people think they are and how they don't
> seem to think that they can function without them.

People can function without them, they just choose not to :-)

Put it this way: when I code in D, I regularly have to look up documentation to find out what functions are available and what arguments a function has. I don't think I've ever done that in C++ or C# using Visual Studio.

And don't get me started on the debugging experience.

On 08/09/13 06:26, Paul Jurczak wrote:
> Right on target. If D wants to achieve some level of visibility for Windows C++
> developers, Visual Studio presence is crucial. We are talking about a huge chunk
> of market share here!
>
> Disclosure: I have to use Visual Studio in work for my clients.

I don't. :-)  I used Visual Studio for a couple of years, about 10 years ago -- these days I work with vim and the Linux command line.  But there's no sense in not recognizing the importance of Visual Studio as a software development tool.

On Sun, 2013-09-08 at 00:35 +0200, Paulo Pinto wrote:
[…]
> Well, if you want a production quality multi-platform IDE the only options are InteliJ and Eclipse, both of which are not that well received by most C and C++ guys. The target audience for D.
> 
> That is my humble opinion, regarding the type of tooling I expect from an IDE.

Or write a D specific platform IDE?

LiteIDE for Go is really, rather good, and way better than the Go mode for Eclipse.

Similar things happen in Python-land. Eclipse/Pydev or strip down Aptana; ItelliJ IDEA or strip down PyCharm are fine, but Wing IDE 101 and Ninja IDEA are actually better.

Sadly, it seems that "one IDE all languages" is an inferior solution to "one language one IDE".

And why is the target audience for D only C and C++ people? Surely the target audience for D is any programmer wanting a native code executable.
-- 
Russel. ============================================================================= Dr Russel Winder      t: +44 20 7585 2200   voip: sip:russel.winder@ekiga.net 41 Buckmaster Road    m: +44 7770 465 077   xmpp: russel@winder.org.uk London SW11 1EN, UK   w: www.russel.org.uk  skype: russel_winder

Am 08.09.2013 13:24, schrieb Russel Winder:
> On Sun, 2013-09-08 at 00:35 +0200, Paulo Pinto wrote:
> […]
>
> And why is the target audience for D only C and C++ people? Surely the
> target audience for D is any programmer wanting a native code
> executable.
>

Because many of us are actually aware of compilers that produce native code for our languages, even if they are not the default way to use them.

To make it more clear, the ML family of languages, Pascal family of
languages, even JVM and .NET environments have native compilers available. You just have to look for them.

Additionally anyone that could move to more productive languages already did.

So it only remains the C and C++ developers, that either by religion or
lack of alternatives, are stuck in their world.

The ones that are stuck by religion, will eventually disappear, given enough time.

So we are left with the ones that cannot move on due to lack of alternatives, hardware constraints or whatever the issue might be.

--
Paulo

On 08/09/13 13:24, Russel Winder wrote:
> And why is the target audience for D only C and C++ people? Surely the
> target audience for D is any programmer wanting a native code
> executable.

They're not the _only_ target audience but they're surely the _main_ target audience.  Users of higher-level languages have presumably made the choice that systems-level performance is not their priority.

That said, I think there's a clear case for D to be made to people who currently have an "Other language plus C" toolchain.  I love D for the fact that it lets you use the high-level constructions of languages like Python but you can also drill down to systems level to optimize performance _without changing language_.

On Sunday, 8 September 2013 at 11:24:32 UTC, Russel Winder wrote:
> And why is the target audience for D only C and C++ people? Surely the
> target audience for D is any programmer wanting a native code
> executable.

I think that D visibility isn't enough for the moment to be able to convince Java or C# dev to take a look in. Those developers that build work oriented applications certainly also wait for much bigger frameworks than phobos in this actual state.

The c++ developers are used to develop a lot of thing from scratch and use tiny libraries for specifics things.

It will certainly take years before seeing much developers coming from Java or C# to D.