On 09/01/2018 07:12 AM, Chris wrote:
> 
> Hope is usually the last thing to die. But one has to be wise enough to see that sometimes there is nothing one can do. As things are now, for me personally D is no longer an option, because of simple basic things, like autodecode, a flaw that will be there forever, poor support for industry technologies (Android, iOS)

Much as I hate to agree, that IS one thing where I'm actually in the same boat:

My primary current paid project centers around converting some legacy Flash stuff to...well, to NOT Flash obviously. I *want* to use D for this very badly. But I'm not. I'm using Unity3D because:

1. For our use right now: It has ready-to-go out-of-the-box WebAsm support (or is it asm.js? Whatever...I can't keep up with the neverending torrent of rubble-bouncing from the web client world.)

2. For our use later: It has ready-to-go out-of-the-box iOS/Android support (along with just about any other platform we could ever possibly hope to care about).

3. It has all the robust multimedia functionality we need ready-to-go on all platforms (actually, its capabilities are totally overkill for us, but that's not a bad problem to have).

4. C# isn't completely totally horrible.

I will be migrating the server back-end to D, but I *really* wish I could be doing the client-side in D too, even if that meant having to build an entire 2D engine off nothing more than SDL. Unfortunately, I just don't feel I can trust the D experience to be robust enough on those platforms right now, and I honestly have no idea when or even if it will get there (Maybe I'm wrong on that. I hope I am. But that IS my impression even as the HUUUGE D fan I am.)

On Saturday, 1 September 2018 at 21:18:27 UTC, Nick Sabalausky (Abscissa) wrote:
> On 09/01/2018 07:12 AM, Chris wrote:
>> 
>> Hope is usually the last thing to die. But one has to be wise enough to see that sometimes there is nothing one can do. As things are now, for me personally D is no longer an option, because of simple basic things, like autodecode, a flaw that will be there forever, poor support for industry technologies (Android, iOS)
>
> Much as I hate to agree, that IS one thing where I'm actually in the same boat:
>
> My primary current paid project centers around converting some legacy Flash stuff to...well, to NOT Flash obviously. I *want* to use D for this very badly. But I'm not. I'm using Unity3D because:
>
> 1. For our use right now: It has ready-to-go out-of-the-box WebAsm support (or is it asm.js? Whatever...I can't keep up with the neverending torrent of rubble-bouncing from the web client world.)
>
> 2. For our use later: It has ready-to-go out-of-the-box iOS/Android support (along with just about any other platform we could ever possibly hope to care about).
>
> 3. It has all the robust multimedia functionality we need ready-to-go on all platforms (actually, its capabilities are totally overkill for us, but that's not a bad problem to have).
>
> 4. C# isn't completely totally horrible.
>
> I will be migrating the server back-end to D, but I *really* wish I could be doing the client-side in D too, even if that meant having to build an entire 2D engine off nothing more than SDL.

> Unfortunately, I just don't feel I can trust the D experience to be robust enough on those platforms right now, and I honestly have no idea when or even if it will get there (Maybe I'm wrong on that. I hope I am. But that IS my impression even as the HUUUGE D fan I am.)

"when or even if" I'm in the same situation but I can't wait anymore. Apps are everywhere these days and if you can't provide some sort of app, you're not in a good position. It's the realty of things, it's not a game, for many of us our jobs depend on it.

Btw, why did I get this message yesterday:

"Your message has been saved, and will be posted after being approved by a moderator."

My message hasn't shown up yet as it hasn't been approved yet ;)

On Saturday, 1 September 2018 at 18:35:30 UTC, TheSixMillionDollarMan wrote:
> On Saturday, 1 September 2018 at 12:33:49 UTC, rjframe wrote:
>> [...]
>
> Stroustrup also said, that "achieving any degree of compatibility [with C/C++] is very hard, as the C/C++ experience shows."
>
> (reference => http://stroustrup.com/hopl-almost-final.pdf  (2007)
>
> (and here refers to D on page 42 btw - that was 11 years ago now).
>
> And yet, D is very intent on doing just that, while also treading its own path.
>
> I personally think this is why D has not taken off, as many would hope. It's hard.
>
> I think it's also why D won't take off, as many hope. It's hard.
>
> Stroustrup was correct (back in the 90's). Yes, it really is hard.
>
> Made even harder now, since C++ has evolved into a 'constantly' moving target...

D++

On Saturday, 1 September 2018 at 12:33:49 UTC, rjframe wrote:
> On Thu, 23 Aug 2018 15:35:45 +0000, Joakim wrote:
>
>>> * Language complexity
>>>
>>> Raise your hand if you know how a class with both opApply and the
>>> get/next/end functions behaves when you pass it to foreach.
>>> How about a struct? Does it matter if it allows copying or not?
>>>
>>> The language was built because C++ was deemed too complex! Please see the thread about lazy [1] for a case where a question actually has an answer, but nobody seems to know it (and the person who does know it is hard pressed to explain the nuance that triggers this).
>> 
>> By this rationale, C++ should be dead by now. Why do you think it's fatal to D?
>
> It's worth noting that C++ isn't always chosen for its technical merits. It's a well-known language whose more or less standard status in certain domains means it's the default choice; C++ is sometimes used for projects in which Stroustrup would say it's obviously the wrong language for the job.
>
> D is far more likely to require justification based on technical merit. If D becomes another C++, why bother taking a chance with D when you can just use C++, use a well-supported, commonly-used compiler, and hire from a bigger pool of jobseekers?

That's why the people that adopt D will inordinately be principals not agents in the beginning. They will either be residual claimants on earnings or will have acquired the authority to make decisions without persuading a committee that makes decisions on the grounds of social factors.

If D becomes another C++ ?  C++ was ugly from the beginning (in my personal subjective assessment) whereas D was designed by people with good taste.

That's why it appeals inordinately to people with good taste.

In Hong Kong we had some difficulty hiring a support person for a trading floor.  Spoke in some cases to the most senior person in HK for even large and well-known funds (small office in this case) and they simply were not good enough.  Thanks to someone from the D community I met a headhunter who used to be at Yandex but realized the money was better as a headhunter.

They don't have many financial clients I think, don't have connections on the talent side in finance.  But the runners up were by far better than anyone we had found through other sources and the best was outstanding.

Good job, I said.  It's funny that the person we hired came from a big bank when other headhunters are looking in the same place and know that world better.  By the way, how many people did you interact with to find X ?  In London if a headhunter puts 10 people before you and you are really pretty happy then that's a good day.  He said two hundred !  And they had to come up with a hiring test too.

So the basic reason they could find good people in technology in finance when others couldn't is that they have much better taste.

Do you see ?  The others knew many more people, they had experience doing it, and somebody who had to persuade a committee would have found it hard to justify.

Programming ability follows a Pareto curve - see the best and the rest.  There might be many more C++, Python and C# programmers.  The incidence of outstanding ones is lower than in the D community for the very reason that only someone obtuse or very smart will learn D for career reasons - intrinsic motivation draws the highest talent.

It depends if your model of people doing work is an army of intelligent trained monkeys or a force made up  of small elite groups of the best people you have ever worked with.  Of course the general of the trained monkey army is going to be difficult to persuade.  And so ?

On the other hand, someone who is smart and has good taste and has earned the right to decide - D is a less popular language that has fewer tutorials and less shiny IDE and debugger support.  Well if you're a small company and you are directly or in effect a proxy owner of the residual (ie an owner of some kind) it's a pragmatic question and saying nobody got fired for buying IBM - that's missing the point because the success is yours and the failure is yours and you can't pass the buck.

The beauty of being the underdog is that it's easy to succeed.  You don't need to be the top dog, and in fact it's not strategically wise to do something that might think you stand a chance - let them think what they want.  The underdog just needs to keep improving and keep getting more adoption, which I don't have much doubt is happening.

Modern people can be like children in their impatience sometimes!

I've only been programming since 1983 so I had the benefit of high level languages like BBC BASIC, C, a Forth I wrote myself, and Modula 3.  And although I had to write a disassembler at least I has assemblers built in.  Programming using a hex keypad is not that satisfying after a while.  It takes a long time to develop a language, its ecosystem and community.

An S curve is quite flat in the beginning.  D is a very ambitious language so of course in any one domain it seems like nobody is using it, but this is deceptive.  It isn't like Go where its more used for a particular purpose.

Anyone that thinks they are a strong programmer by comparison with others in their world and can keep up here and would like to write D should contact me (if you can't see my email then Michael Parker will have it).  And if the same but they would like to write C#, Python or Julia then that also applies.

Dicebot wrote in the old post that triggered this discussion something that people interpreted as meaning he was leaving D.  Around the same time as his old post was discovered he released his version of dtoh that he intends to be integrated into the compiler.  So he may or may not have changed his mind about making upstream contributions but this is something pretty close to that even if it's not the same.

It's not for me to say, but I believe he continues to work in D professionally also.

It would be wonderful if we could get back to figuring out what constructive steps we could take to make a better world.  People who make predictions should back their views with something - they should have skin in the game.  If someone wants to make a prediction about D I am happy to take the other side of a wager if I disagree strongly.  I play for high stakes - usually cups of coffee.  I have a bet with my economist that there won't be another referendum about whether to leave or soft Vs hard before we leave the EU.  I win two coffees if no referendum and lose one if there is.  Since it takes six months to prepare the question and Brexit date is March, I think that's not bad for me.

after the beta i tried it the final again - just to be fair.

1.) install d, install visual d.
2.) trying to to look at options under visual d without a project crashes VS2017 - latest
    service pack.
3.) VS2017 - displays a problem on startup
4.) creating the dummy project - compile for x64. error something is missing.
5.) deinstall everything and wait for another year

this crap does not even work out of the box - what else is not tested in D?

i guess you don't intend to draw crowds to D and just keep talking on how to this and that a little better in the compiler pet project.

is D that dead that the releases are not tested or do you want to keep all windows users out?

On Sunday, 2 September 2018 at 14:48:34 UTC, lurker wrote:
> after the beta i tried it the final again - just to be fair.
>
> 1.) install d, install visual d.
> 2.) trying to to look at options under visual d without a project crashes VS2017 - latest
>     service pack.
> 3.) VS2017 - displays a problem on startup
> 4.) creating the dummy project - compile for x64. error something is missing.
> 5.) deinstall everything and wait for another year
>
> this crap does not even work out of the box - what else is not tested in D?
>
> i guess you don't intend to draw crowds to D and just keep talking on how to this and that a little better in the compiler pet project.
>
> is D that dead that the releases are not tested or do you want to keep all windows users out?


Don't worry, that is just the beginning... It's like that in all aspects. The design is fundamentally flawed and no one seems to care(or recognize it). Software is far too complex now days to be using mentalities of the 60's and 70's.

On Sunday, 2 September 2018 at 14:48:34 UTC, lurker wrote:
> after the beta i tried it the final again - just to be fair.
>
> 1.) install d, install visual d.
> 2.) trying to to look at options under visual d without a project crashes VS2017 - latest
>     service pack.
> 3.) VS2017 - displays a problem on startup
> 4.) creating the dummy project - compile for x64. error something is missing.
> 5.) deinstall everything and wait for another year
>
> this crap does not even work out of the box - what else is not tested in D?
>
> i guess you don't intend to draw crowds to D and just keep talking on how to this and that a little better in the compiler pet project.
>
> is D that dead that the releases are not tested or do you want to keep all windows users out?

There are a lot of motivated people here willing to help you to get your issue solved if you provide the details.

I can confirm that DMD is working like a charm for me (different visual studio versions on build servers, MS build tools on local pc). I use IntelliJ instead of Visual Studio, but that is only my personal preferation.

Kind regards
Andre

On Sun, 2 Sep 2018 at 16:05, Andre Pany via Digitalmars-d <digitalmars-d@puremagic.com> wrote:
>
> On Sunday, 2 September 2018 at 14:48:34 UTC, lurker wrote:
> > after the beta i tried it the final again - just to be fair.
> >
> > 1.) install d, install visual d.
> > 2.) trying to to look at options under visual d without a
> > project crashes VS2017 - latest
> >     service pack.
> > 3.) VS2017 - displays a problem on startup
> > 4.) creating the dummy project - compile for x64. error
> > something is missing.
> > 5.) deinstall everything and wait for another year
> >
> > this crap does not even work out of the box - what else is not tested in D?
> >
> > i guess you don't intend to draw crowds to D and just keep talking on how to this and that a little better in the compiler pet project.
> >
> > is D that dead that the releases are not tested or do you want to keep all windows users out?
>
> There are a lot of motivated people here willing to help you to get your issue solved if you provide the details.
>
> I can confirm that DMD is working like a charm for me (different visual studio versions on build servers, MS build tools on local pc). I use IntelliJ instead of Visual Studio, but that is only my personal preferation.
>
> Kind regards
> Andre

I'm currently installing VS2017 to test your anecdote (been on 2015 for ages)... although I use VS2017 at work and haven't had any problems.

On Sunday, 2 September 2018 at 14:48:34 UTC, lurker wrote:
> after the beta i tried it the final again - just to be fair.
>
> 1.) install d, install visual d.
> 2.) trying to to look at options under visual d without a project crashes VS2017 - latest
>     service pack.
> 3.) VS2017 - displays a problem on startup
> 4.) creating the dummy project - compile for x64. error something is missing.
> 5.) deinstall everything and wait for another year
>
> this crap does not even work out of the box - what else is not tested in D?
>
> i guess you don't intend to draw crowds to D and just keep talking on how to this and that a little better in the compiler pet project.
>
> is D that dead that the releases are not tested or do you want to keep all windows users out?

Visual D is not official, remember that.

Most people would go with VS Code anyway.

On Sunday, 2 September 2018 at 14:48:34 UTC, lurker wrote:
> after the beta i tried it the final again - just to be fair.
>
> 1.) install d, install visual d.
> 2.) trying to to look at options under visual d without a project crashes VS2017 - latest
>     service pack.
> 3.) VS2017 - displays a problem on startup
> 4.) creating the dummy project - compile for x64. error something is missing.
> 5.) deinstall everything and wait for another year
>
> this crap does not even work out of the box - what else is not tested in D?
>
> i guess you don't intend to draw crowds to D and just keep talking on how to this and that a little better in the compiler pet project.
>
> is D that dead that the releases are not tested or do you want to keep all windows users out?

Oh and also your error is probably that you're missing the C++ build tools which come with the correct linker for x64, as far as I remember.