On Sat, 30 Dec 2017 23:04:21 +0000, Nicholas Wilson wrote:

> I can hear him already, "Post it on buzzkill or it won't get fixed!"

He does have a point. At work, people often email me directly, or stop me in the hallway, to report things that belong on the issue tracker. I consistently tell people that if I don't fix something the same day, it likely isn't going to happen unless it's on the issue tracker, yet again and again they'll tell me of a problem in person, quite often when I've left my organizer in my office.

There is an official method of dealing with bugs, so that needs to be the system used, and consistently used. If the current system is insufficient, it should be improved or replaced, but you can't run reports from IRC or the NG.

On 12/30/2017 3:04 PM, Nicholas Wilson wrote:
> I can hear him already, "Post it on buzzkill or it won't get fixed!"

It's already on bugzilla, and was already fixed.

On 12/30/2017 3:47 PM, rjframe wrote:
> He does have a point. At work, people often email me directly, or stop me
> in the hallway, to report things that belong on the issue tracker. I
> consistently tell people that if I don't fix something the same day, it
> likely isn't going to happen unless it's on the issue tracker, yet again
> and again they'll tell me of a problem in person, quite often when I've
> left my organizer in my office.
> 
> There is an official method of dealing with bugs, so that needs to be the
> system used, and consistently used. If the current system is insufficient,
> it should be improved or replaced, but you can't run reports from IRC or
> the NG.

You're exactly right.

Before Brad Roberts set up bugzilla, the bug reporting system was an email folder on my system. Such a thing does not scale, was completely disorganized and erratic, was not accessible by anyone but me, etc.

Having a centralized, organized, professional bug reporting system is the *only* practical way of managing bug reports, discussions about them, status, statistics, and resolutions.

Verbal reports, emails, forum postings, chat logs, reddit, etc., is completely impractical as a bug reporting system once a project exceeds a certain size, and D exceeded that threshold a long, long time ago.

While filing a bugzilla issue does not guarantee action, not filing an issue pretty much guarantees no action.

On Saturday, 30 December 2017 at 21:40:29 UTC, Adam Wilson wrote:
>
> This is not true. I was at DConf one year (can't remember which) and I watched the representative of one of D's larger corporate users do everything but actually get on his knees and beg Walter to make a breaking change. IIRC they demonstrated their work around for the missing change a couple of DConf's later.
>

Are you referring to this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DinkkD6Pt34

We don't all need to be that "ruthless with memory efficiency" ( e.g.I have 24GB of memory on my desktop pc! GC kicks in at what...20MB??)

But some really good points were made nonetheless, and I enjoyed the perspective he offered.

> Let's fix the crap we have now. It'll take a while, it's not sexy, and it certainly won't make headlines on HN or Reddit. But it will have the effect of combating the biggest negative that D has to adoption. The perception of instability.

A little overstated perhaps.. I certainly would not be using the word 'crap' or 'instability' describe the current state of D.

But D could benefit from some focused tender love, and care ;-)

On Sat, 2017-12-30 at 17:53 +0000, Ola Fosheim Grøstad via Digitalmars- d wrote:
> On Thursday, 28 December 2017 at 11:56:24 UTC, Russel Winder wrote:
> > And is the way every programmer learns their non-first language. All newly learned programming languages are merged into a person's "head language" which is based on their first language but then evolves as new languages, especially of new computational mode, are learned.
> > 
> > See Marian Petre and others work over the last 30 years for scientific evidence of this.
> 
> Hm…  I have some problem with this.  I can see how it would apply to Algol-like languages, but for I don't see how it fits on very different concepts like SQL/datalog/prolog, scheme, machine language, OO etc…

The core differentiator is the number of computational models, not programming language, that can be worked with with competence. So C++/Lisp/Prolog represents a better triad than C/C++/D. If you have doubts read the papers, the science is good, the hypotheses are confirmed.

> There might be some empirical issues here as _most_ programmers would move to something similar, but statistical significance doesn't imply causality…

The results are based on experimental data. Read the papers rather than my waffle about them.

-- 
Russel.
===========================================
Dr Russel Winder      t: +44 20 7585 2200
41 Buckmaster Road    m: +44 7770 465 077
London SW11 1EN, UK   w: www.russel.org.uk

On Sunday, 31 December 2017 at 14:51:24 UTC, Russel Winder wrote:
> The results are based on experimental data. Read the papers rather than my waffle about them.

I'd love to, but I haven't found the specific paper. She seems to work on many different things related to software design and visual tooling.

On Sun, 2017-12-31 at 17:32 +0000, Ola Fosheim Grøstad via Digitalmars- d wrote:
> 
[…]
> I'd love to, but I haven't found the specific paper. She seems to work on many different things related to software design and visual tooling.

I'll email her and get the best start point citation for you.

-- 
Russel.
===========================================
Dr Russel Winder      t: +44 20 7585 2200
41 Buckmaster Road    m: +44 7770 465 077
London SW11 1EN, UK   w: www.russel.org.uk

On Wed, 2017-12-27 at 19:11 +0000, Laeeth Isharc via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
[…]
> People also continue to think and write as if the D Foundation has this inexhaustible fund of resources (pecuniary and people) that it can command to work on whatever Andrei and Walter think best.

But on the other hand there is little or no presence of The D Foundation in online places I frequent. The D Foundation does need to have a plan for becoming a thing that people would put resource into.

> It's open source!  It doesn't work like that.
> 
> If you want people to work on something, write a proof of concept and talk about it.  Talking to the aether about what people ought to be doing will be less effective than finding one guy who agrees with you and working on the project together.  And if not working on it yourself, then organising a fund and making an initial contribution towards a prize for someone who will.
> 
> And if one isn't willing either to work on something oneself, or to contribute financially towards its development, just how likely is it you will persuade somebody else to do the work in a community of highly intelligent, spirited, and independent-minded people?

This bears repeating, so I have done by resending.

The ASF has the idea of a project being a "do-ocracy" Those that do have rights of credit and opinion. It a bit more complicated than that since it doesn't stop people from having opinions as long as they are constructive rather than rhetorical. However, it is a nice headline.

-- 
Russel.
===========================================
Dr Russel Winder      t: +44 20 7585 2200
41 Buckmaster Road    m: +44 7770 465 077
London SW11 1EN, UK   w: www.russel.org.uk

On Monday, 29 January 2018 at 10:34:35 UTC, Russel Winder wrote:
> On Wed, 2017-12-27 at 19:11 +0000, Laeeth Isharc via Digitalmars-d
> wrote:
> […]
>> People also continue to think and write as if the D Foundation has this inexhaustible fund of resources (pecuniary and people) that it can command to work on whatever Andrei and Walter think best.
>
> But on the other hand there is little or no presence of The D Foundation in online places I frequent. The D Foundation does need to have a plan for becoming a thing that people would put resource into.

For example, any news on the new CTFE?

/Paolo