On Tuesday, 20 September 2016 at 20:35:49 UTC, Daniel Kozak wrote:
>
>
> Dne 20.9.2016 v 22:01 Karabuta via Digitalmars-d napsal(a):
>> On Tuesday, 20 September 2016 at 19:47:12 UTC, WebFreak001 wrote:
>>> On Tuesday, 20 September 2016 at 19:14:41 UTC, Intersteller wrote:
>>>> Vibe.d looks great on the surface but lack of documentation, commonly used functionality, and that it looks like it is dying suggests that putting any effort in to it will be a waste. Go, OTH, has tons of frameworks, most are actively support, very well documented(beego, revel, etc), and feature rich.
>>>
>>> What is vibe.d missing? It works great for me and the documentation is great imo too because it has everything I need. I use vibe.d at the company I work at and I use it for all my websites. I never had any problems with it
>>
>> Lets me say from a beginners perspective,
>> * How do I build a file upload form (single and multiple file uploads)
>> * How do I work with mongoDB to do CRUD.
>> * How do I use the Web API beyond hello world!
>> * Form validation?
>> * Data sanitization?
>> * How do I structure my application for real-world (reusable and maintainable code) e.g for a simple blog, simple CMS etc. :)
>> ...
>>
>> Some of these things may seem easy to figure-out but can be difficult for a beginner unless he/she has a copy of Kai's book at the moment (D Web Development) :)
> Nothing of this is specific for vibe.d, so I do not see any reason to have doc about this in vibe.d

I would say otherwise. I've built multiple sites in vibe-d, so I probably wouldn't need them, but having a vibe-d specific beginner tutorial from start to end of a project would be great.

Sonke wrote a good blog post a while back with a chat system, and there's a new blogger using vibe too. But we could do with more.
I guess I should take that up maybe. Not sure if I have the time though, and I don't  have a whole pile of interest in blogging...

Dne 20.9.2016 v 22:59 wobbles via Digitalmars-d napsal(a):

> On Tuesday, 20 September 2016 at 20:35:49 UTC, Daniel Kozak wrote:
>>
>>
>> Dne 20.9.2016 v 22:01 Karabuta via Digitalmars-d napsal(a):
>>> On Tuesday, 20 September 2016 at 19:47:12 UTC, WebFreak001 wrote:
>>>> On Tuesday, 20 September 2016 at 19:14:41 UTC, Intersteller wrote:
>>>>> Vibe.d looks great on the surface but lack of documentation, commonly used functionality, and that it looks like it is dying suggests that putting any effort in to it will be a waste. Go, OTH, has tons of frameworks, most are actively support, very well documented(beego, revel, etc), and feature rich.
>>>>
>>>> What is vibe.d missing? It works great for me and the documentation is great imo too because it has everything I need. I use vibe.d at the company I work at and I use it for all my websites. I never had any problems with it
>>>
>>> Lets me say from a beginners perspective,
>>> * How do I build a file upload form (single and multiple file uploads)
>>> * How do I work with mongoDB to do CRUD.
>>> * How do I use the Web API beyond hello world!
>>> * Form validation?
>>> * Data sanitization?
>>> * How do I structure my application for real-world (reusable and maintainable code) e.g for a simple blog, simple CMS etc. :)
>>> ...
>>>
>>> Some of these things may seem easy to figure-out but can be difficult for a beginner unless he/she has a copy of Kai's book at the moment (D Web Development) :)
>> Nothing of this is specific for vibe.d, so I do not see any reason to have doc about this in vibe.d
>
> I would say otherwise. I've built multiple sites in vibe-d, so I probably wouldn't need them, but having a vibe-d specific beginner tutorial from start to end of a project would be great.
>
> Sonke wrote a good blog post a while back with a chat system, and there's a new blogger using vibe too. But we could do with more.
> I guess I should take that up maybe. Not sure if I have the time though, and I don't  have a whole pile of interest in blogging...

My fault. I was speaking about doc (API), I do not say anything about tutorial and so on. Yes I belive having more tutorials and howtos it is a good thing.

On Tuesday, 20 September 2016 at 20:35:49 UTC, Daniel Kozak wrote:
>
>
> Dne 20.9.2016 v 22:01 Karabuta via Digitalmars-d napsal(a):
>> [...]
> Nothing of this is specific for vibe.d, so I do not see any reason to have doc about this in vibe.d

Could he be asking for little examples of the above bullets?  Maybe small working examples online?

On Tuesday, 20 September 2016 at 21:19:49 UTC, Daniel Kozak wrote:
>
> My fault. I was speaking about doc (API), I do not say anything about tutorial and so on. Yes I belive having more tutorials and howtos it is a good thing.

I don't think anyone would disagree wrt tutorials and how tos. I don't think anyone has mentioned D Web Development, which the OP might find a good source.

On Tuesday, 20 September 2016 at 22:17:26 UTC, WhatMeWorry wrote:
> On Tuesday, 20 September 2016 at 20:35:49 UTC, Daniel Koz
> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Dne 20.9.2016 v 22:01 Karabuta via Digitalmars-d napsal(a):
>>> [...]
>> Nothing of this is specific for vibe.d, so I do not see any reason to have doc about this in vibe.d
>
> Could he be asking for little examples of the above bullets?  Maybe small working examples online?

It would help a lot just to pull out the unit tests and add a few comments and put them up on web under sample usage...   I suggested to Sonke before,  but there's always a lot to do.

On Tuesday, 20 September 2016 at 20:59:18 UTC, wobbles wrote:
> I would say otherwise. I've built multiple sites in vibe-d, so I probably wouldn't need them, but having a vibe-d specific beginner tutorial from start to end of a project would be great.
>

Tutorial != doc.

On Wednesday, 21 September 2016 at 01:15:22 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
> On Tuesday, 20 September 2016 at 20:59:18 UTC, wobbles wrote:
>> I would say otherwise. I've built multiple sites in vibe-d, so I probably wouldn't need them, but having a vibe-d specific beginner tutorial from start to end of a project would be great.
>>
>
> Tutorial != doc.

I agree and if you know web development and have done any significant development vibe should not be hard to learn off the docs.  If the OP was to say anything about ecosystem then yes Go maybe a better option for the OP.  I don't think vibe is bad but ecosystem is more lacking for the developer who just wants stuff to work and not put in the leg work on fixing bugs/features in various pieces of the development of web applications.

On 09/20/2016 03:14 PM, Intersteller wrote:
> Vibe.d looks great on the surface but  lack of documentation,

http://vibed.org/docs
http://vibed.org/api

There's also two examples right on the homepage. Did you try scrolling?

I'll grant that the stupid "modern" sales-pitch-first, content-hidden-in-small-print-below web design style that's so popular and now used on vibe's homepage makes those harder to find than they should be, but still, these ARE right there on the homepage, and it's very complete.

> commonly used functionality,

Not really. Cite examples of such missing functionality?

> and that it looks like it is dying suggests that

You're just making that up, aren't you?
Here: https://github.com/rejectedsoftware/vibe.d/commits/master

Not to be a dick, but you really didn't look *at all*, did you?

...I could care less why you are switching to Go...

On Wed, 21 Sep 2016 09:56:01 -0400, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
> Not to be a dick, but you really didn't look *at all*, did you?

You *are* being a dick. Please stop it.

When someone takes the time to post something like this, they are reporting the pain they experienced. They might not articulate the precise problem that exists, but that general area has a significant pain point. Berating them is an inappropriate response.

Vibe has some documentation. Either Intersteller didn't find it after what they thought a reasonable amount of searching, or they found it and found it lacking.

Features whose documentation you can't find are equivalent to missing features.

Vibe is under active development. This apparently isn't advertised well enough for Intersteller to be confident in it. The home page has release announcements for February and July, which seems appropriate for a small project occasionally worked on. In this case, it's a moderately large project steadily worked on, with blog posts about as frequent as the golang.org blog.