On Tuesday, 9 May 2023 at 12:27:30 UTC, FeepingCreature wrote:
To be honest, this has always been my take as well.
On Tuesday, 9 May 2023 at 15:46:12 UTC, Paul Backus wrote:
I basically agree with this
I feel if I was understood, only people with (at least) one foot out the door would agree easily.
As it stands anytime anyone says "I want to help D" in the discord, I and several others basically go out of our way to dissuade that notion; that's damning to the long-term health of the language. Thats not changing on my end, Im practicing what I preach, minor political changes won't convince me. Can anyone tell me with a straight face that the last guy to say "Hi im new, d lacks a crypto lib in the std, is that something I could help with?" shouldn't have been told to avoid that like the plague?
Michael Malice has this concept of "Nancy Pelosi 4th favorite ice cream"; every night she has a pint of icecream, 90% of the time she picks her favorite and so on.
She hasn't eaten her 4th favorite icecream in 3 years, is she lying?
(nancy says she is for freedom, but when asked if she would legalize meth/ legalize nukes/ get rid of all taxes, said no everytime)
I think this leads to a "blunt fact" you can only have so many principles. Every official D codebase uses the official style guide, cares about the long-term vision, and who knows what other unstated requirements.
I believe "coherent vision" must be discarded for some part of the process.
"Management" does not always mean "telling people what to do". Sometimes (often!) it means removing roadblocks and bottlenecks that get in the way of people doing what they already want to do.
The way I read the main post is not "We are changing our fundamental values to be more flexible" it's more "I'm making an effort to communicate the team's vision better". I don't believe this issue is that; I hear the team's vision very very loudly, I could tell you a few reasons why the std won't get new data structures this decade(much less the ones I would suggest). It's not a lack of communication of them to me, Im just willing to summarize "we can't make data structures, you should use @nogc @live and @safe, your code isn't our style, allocators are coming" to "no".
D seems to plan on telling people what's acceptable at exactly the same rate, for the foreseeable future; I see nothing that would make anything I write acceptable to it.
(Honestly, maybe 80% of the time when I've seen "D needs better management", it has been code for "D management didn't like my proposal.")
Yes, d needs better management because d didn't like my proposal.
I mean "anarchic" when I ask for a redesign of std.experimental. I don't see a future healthy growth of the language when any member of the dev team has a say on everything.
I see no shuffling of decision-making capabilities that would resolve the issues.
When I say "d has a community of meta-programming crazed iconoclasts" and "don't herd cats"; I do mean the community, genius doesn't necessarily play nice with others or lead people to work for free with poor working conditions. I'm not really saying nice things about myself or the other people who left or are unwilling to contribute for whatever reason. But I would suggest the solution to courting the iconoclastic elements isn't with something tested in corporate culture, corporations generally pay to have people tolerate their demands, D must compete with the freedom of doing your own project.