http://arsdnet.net/this-week-in-d/mar-15.html

Also remember about the RSS feed here:
http://arsdnet.net/this-week-in-d/twid.rss

I'm currently out west so I'm a couple hours off, but here's the next installment with summaries of forum discussions - with a few of my opinions added in - and a contributed interview! Lots of cool stuff this week.

On Monday, 16 March 2015 at 04:54:12 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
> http://arsdnet.net/this-week-in-d/mar-15.html
>
> Also remember about the RSS feed here:
> http://arsdnet.net/this-week-in-d/twid.rss
>
> I'm currently out west so I'm a couple hours off, but here's the next installment with summaries of forum discussions - with a few of my opinions added in - and a contributed interview! Lots of cool stuff this week.

Nice! I like the inteview!

Here is the reddit post:
http://www.reddit.com/r/d_language/comments/2z7ai5/this_week_in_d_9_marketing_discussion_final_beta/

On Monday, 16 March 2015 at 04:54:12 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
> http://arsdnet.net/this-week-in-d/mar-15.html
>
> Also remember about the RSS feed here:
> http://arsdnet.net/this-week-in-d/twid.rss
>
> I'm currently out west so I'm a couple hours off, but here's the next installment with summaries of forum discussions - with a few of my opinions added in - and a contributed interview! Lots of cool stuff this week.

Nice ! The interview is a cool idea.
Nitpick: Loose "(P" after the dub question ;)

More interviews please :P

On Monday, 16 March 2015 at 04:54:12 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
> http://arsdnet.net/this-week-in-d/mar-15.html
>
> Also remember about the RSS feed here:
> http://arsdnet.net/this-week-in-d/twid.rss
>
> I'm currently out west so I'm a couple hours off, but here's the next installment with summaries of forum discussions - with a few of my opinions added in - and a contributed interview! Lots of cool stuff this week.

DDOC is showing through:

"($P - DUB was born as a spin-off of vibe.d" and the closing paren at the end of the paragraph.

On Monday, 16 March 2015 at 04:54:12 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
> Ruby has over 6,000 packages,

...starting with letter A. It's over 100K in total.
http://www.modulecounts.com/

On Monday, 16 March 2015 at 12:45:58 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote:
> On Monday, 16 March 2015 at 04:54:12 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
>> Ruby has over 6,000 packages,
>
> ...starting with letter A. It's over 100K in total.
> http://www.modulecounts.com/

Hey, that's over 6000 ;)

Also, yes more interviews please.

On Monday, 16 March 2015 at 13:06:39 UTC, weaselcat wrote:
> On Monday, 16 March 2015 at 12:45:58 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote:
>> On Monday, 16 March 2015 at 04:54:12 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
>>> Ruby has over 6,000 packages,
>>
>> ...starting with letter A. It's over 100K in total.
>> http://www.modulecounts.com/
>
> Hey, that's over 6000 ;)
>
> Also, yes more interviews please.

Also also,

> An example of a simple but fundamental issue are the defaults of the built-in attributes. I think some of them, for historical or compatibility reasons, are currently simply the wrong way around (pure, @safe, final and scope should really all be enabled by default, with scope providing recursive guarantees) and using them properly completely destroys the initial idea of having a clean language syntax. It's sometimes really sad to see modern idiomatic D code degrading into a mess of attributes and contract syntax noise. After all, a clean syntax used to be one of the key selling points.

+1 for this entire paragraph, sometimes D looks simple and elegant, other times it looks like someone puked attributes.

On Monday, 16 March 2015 at 13:11:56 UTC, weaselcat wrote:
>> An example of a simple but fundamental issue are the defaults of the built-in attributes. I think some of them, for historical or compatibility reasons, are currently simply the wrong way around (pure, @safe, final and scope should really all be enabled by default, with scope providing recursive guarantees) and using them properly completely destroys the initial idea of having a clean language syntax. It's sometimes really sad to see modern idiomatic D code degrading into a mess of attributes and contract syntax noise. After all, a clean syntax used to be one of the key selling points.
>
> +1 for this entire paragraph, sometimes D looks simple and elegant, other times it looks like someone puked attributes.

Rust code is safe by default and it is littered with unsafe{ } blocks.
It is also immutable by default and it is littered with the 'mut' keyword.

I think D absolutely choose the good defaults everytime but some attribute don't buy enough compared to the line-noise they generate.

For these reasons I mostly ignore pure, nothrow, @safe, immutable etc... in routine code and only put them when the code is especially reusable and somehow won't change much.

Since D1 I really value the ability to make bad code quickly in time-contrained situations.

On Monday, 16 March 2015 at 13:21:13 UTC, ponce wrote:
> On Monday, 16 March 2015 at 13:11:56 UTC, weaselcat wrote:
>>> An example of a simple but fundamental issue are the defaults of the built-in attributes. I think some of them, for historical or compatibility reasons, are currently simply the wrong way around (pure, @safe, final and scope should really all be enabled by default, with scope providing recursive guarantees) and using them properly completely destroys the initial idea of having a clean language syntax. It's sometimes really sad to see modern idiomatic D code degrading into a mess of attributes and contract syntax noise. After all, a clean syntax used to be one of the key selling points.
>>
>> +1 for this entire paragraph, sometimes D looks simple and elegant, other times it looks like someone puked attributes.
>
> Rust code is safe by default and it is littered with unsafe{ } blocks.

I think this has more to do with Rust's extreme safety, many things doable in @safe D code would be no-no in Rust(i.e, you can't even manipulate pointers IIRC)