Hello:

I have read the Sinbad forum, which it's a Ogre3D in D. The author thinks with
no 1.0 spec, it discourages them from making such a project. Ogre3D is nice and
currently is one of good free DirectX wrappers. If Ogre3D can have
the D version. I think it's a nice thing to the D community.

And...I am just curious, after 5 years, when will the 1.0 of D be out?? Squirrel is a 2 years old language, and it already hits 2.1. And we remember Perl, Perl has their spec fixed fast in earlier version while Perl 6 is a bit slow.

I am not sure what is left in the version 1.0, but like an ordinary project it should have some timeline, or something left to do. 5 years aren't short, and to tell the truth I have a feeling that other languages would catch up by learning the merits of D, while D seems not final yet without a formal 1.0 version.

sailormoontw wrote:

> Hello:
> 
> I have read the Sinbad forum, which it's a Ogre3D in D. The author thinks with no 1.0 spec, it discourages them from making such a project. Ogre3D is nice and currently is one of good free DirectX wrappers. If Ogre3D can have the D version. I think it's a nice thing to the D community.
> 
> And...I am just curious, after 5 years, when will the 1.0 of D be out?? Squirrel is a 2 years old language, and it already hits 2.1. And we remember Perl, Perl has their spec fixed fast in earlier version while Perl 6 is a bit slow.
> 
> I am not sure what is left in the version 1.0, but like an ordinary project it should have some timeline, or something left to do. 5 years aren't short, and to tell the truth I have a feeling that other languages would catch up by learning the merits of D, while D seems not final yet without a formal 1.0 version.

I disagree with Chris on the 1.0 part, Sinbad is quite possible to do, just a lot of work to get a 3D engine that is inherently designed with C++ in mind. I think new 3D engine designs based on what is possible in D, is a much more worthwhile thing to do, or at least port a engine that don't use multiple inheritance.

-- 
Lars Ivar Igesund
blog at http://larsivi.net
DSource & #D: larsivi

Lars Ivar Igesund wrote:
> sailormoontw wrote:
> 
> 
>>Hello:
>>
>>I have read the Sinbad forum, which it's a Ogre3D in D. The author thinks
>>with no 1.0 spec, it discourages them from making such a project. Ogre3D
>>is nice and currently is one of good free DirectX wrappers. If Ogre3D can
>>have the D version. I think it's a nice thing to the D community.
>>
>>And...I am just curious, after 5 years, when will the 1.0 of D be out??
>>Squirrel is a 2 years old language, and it already hits 2.1. And we
>>remember Perl, Perl has their spec fixed fast in earlier version while
>>Perl 6 is a bit slow.
>>
>>I am not sure what is left in the version 1.0, but like an ordinary
>>project it should have some timeline, or something left to do. 5 years
>>aren't short, and to tell the truth I have a feeling that other languages
>>would catch up by learning the merits of D, while D seems not final yet
>>without a formal 1.0 version.
> 
> 
> I disagree with Chris on the 1.0 part, Sinbad is quite possible to do, just
> a lot of work to get a 3D engine that is inherently designed with C++ in
> mind. I think new 3D engine designs based on what is possible in D, is a
> much more worthwhile thing to do, or at least port a engine that don't use
> multiple inheritance.
> 

I maintain my stance on needing a 1.0 and the reason is simple: I was constantly rethinking my ideas regarding Sinbad because of New Feature X and all the nifty improvements it offered.  Although honestly, I'm starting to think the Sinbad project being a direct port of Ogre is a bad idea, and it should be a fresh from-scratch engine designed "in the spirit of" Ogre.  Unfortunately, I haven't the time nor the gumption to pull that heavy of a task off...  Its sad, really.

-- Chris Nicholson-Sauls

Lars Ivar Igesund wrote:

> I disagree with Chris on the 1.0 part, Sinbad is quite possible to do, just
> a lot of work to get a 3D engine that is inherently designed with C++ in
> mind. I think new 3D engine designs based on what is possible in D, is a
> much more worthwhile thing to do, or at least port a engine that don't use
> multiple inheritance.
> 

I completely agree... D is more than capable to handle this task right now.  It's just really comes down to people having the time and resources to attempt such a large task.

But Ogre done using D style, syntax, and features would be a very capable library and quite possibly could eclipse the original C++ version.

-JJR

In article <e7c3hj$gf1$1@digitaldaemon.com>, Lars Ivar Igesund says...
>
>sailormoontw wrote:
>
>> Hello:
>> 
>> I have read the Sinbad forum, which it's a Ogre3D in D. The author thinks with no 1.0 spec, it discourages them from making such a project. Ogre3D is nice and currently is one of good free DirectX wrappers. If Ogre3D can have the D version. I think it's a nice thing to the D community.
>> 
>> And...I am just curious, after 5 years, when will the 1.0 of D be out?? Squirrel is a 2 years old language, and it already hits 2.1. And we remember Perl, Perl has their spec fixed fast in earlier version while Perl 6 is a bit slow.
>> 
>> I am not sure what is left in the version 1.0, but like an ordinary project it should have some timeline, or something left to do. 5 years aren't short, and to tell the truth I have a feeling that other languages would catch up by learning the merits of D, while D seems not final yet without a formal 1.0 version.
>
>I disagree with Chris on the 1.0 part, Sinbad is quite possible to do, just a lot of work to get a 3D engine that is inherently designed with C++ in mind. I think new 3D engine designs based on what is possible in D, is a much more worthwhile thing to do, or at least port a engine that don't use multiple inheritance.
>
>-- 
>Lars Ivar Igesund
>blog at http://larsivi.net
>DSource & #D: larsivi

D can support a form of multiple inheritance, called "Mixin Inheritance". D's mixins seems sometimes closer to traits than mixins used in Smalltalk.

# import std.stdio ;

# template A ( T )
# {
#     class A : T
#     {
#         public :
#             char [] message ;

#             this ( char [] msg )
#             {
#                 this.message = msg ;
#             }
#     }
# }

# template B ( T )
# {
#     class B : T
#     {
#         public :
#             this ( char [] msg ) { super ( msg ); }
#
#             void printSomething ( char [] message )
#             {
#                 writefln ( "super message : ", message );
#             }
#     }
# }

# template C ( T )
# {
#     class C : T
#     {
#         public :

#             this ( char [] msg ) { super ( msg ); }
#
#             void consoleOutput ()
#             {
#
#                 printSomething ( this.message );
#             }
#     }
# }

# // Create a type that is a C inheriting from both B and A
# // and rename it Multiple.
# alias  C ! ( B ! ( A ! ( Object ) )) Multiple ;

# void main ()
# {
#     auto instance = new Multiple ( "Hello World !" );
#     instance.consoleOutput ();
# }

ray@Moonraker:~/dee/tmp$ ./minheritance
super message : Hello World !

It fakes multiple inheritance by creating parameterized subtypes, called mixins. Then we instanciates an object of a "multiple" inherited class by selecting the right inheritance order : C inherits from B wich inherits from A ( wich inherits from the root of the Hierarchy ).

Thus, we can consider that porting an engine that uses multiple inheritance is possible in theory.

I would like to see some little syntactic sugar, for mixin class :
# mixin class MixedIn : T ( U, V ) {}
That would be a shortcurt for :
# template MixedIn ( T, U, V )
# {
#     class MixedIn : T ( U, V ) {}
# }

A 1.0 step would allow us not to dream too much about a specific feature that won't come before the 2.0 release.

sailormoontw wrote:
> Hello:
> 
> I have read the Sinbad forum, which it's a Ogre3D in D. The author thinks with no 1.0 spec, it discourages them from making such a project. Ogre3D is nice and currently is one of good free DirectX wrappers. If Ogre3D can have the D version. I think it's a nice thing to the D community.

If you want to write a D version of Ogre3D, then I for one am not going
to stop you.

> And...I am just curious, after 5 years, when will the 1.0 of D be out??

I think we should cross this bridge when we get to it.

http://www.digitalmars.com/d/archives/digitalmars/D/35929.html

> Squirrel is a 2 years old language, and it already hits 2.1. And we remember Perl, Perl has their spec fixed fast in earlier version while Perl 6 is a bit slow.

It's not just age.

- How complex is the product?
- How many people have control over the specification?
- How many people have control over the reference implementation?
- How many hours a week are these people working on it?
- Does the version numbering system make sense when compared with ours?

> I am not sure what is left in the version 1.0, but like an ordinary project it should have some timeline, or something left to do.
<snip>

Lots of things left to do if you haven't noticed.

Stewart.

In addition, reference return type, variable template parameter, etc.

The D is far from the 1.0 mile stone.

It's good time for us to have a rest, may be one years, two years...,  :(

"Stewart Gordon" <smjg_1998@yahoo.com> ??????:e7h24l$5p6$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> sailormoontw wrote:
>> Hello:
>>
>> I have read the Sinbad forum, which it's a Ogre3D in D. The author thinks with no 1.0 spec, it discourages them from making such a project. Ogre3D is nice and currently is one of good free DirectX wrappers. If Ogre3D can have the D version. I think it's a nice thing to the D community.
>
> If you want to write a D version of Ogre3D, then I for one am not going to stop you.
>
>> And...I am just curious, after 5 years, when will the 1.0 of D be out??
>
> I think we should cross this bridge when we get to it.
>
> http://www.digitalmars.com/d/archives/digitalmars/D/35929.html
>
>> Squirrel is a 2 years old language, and it already hits 2.1. And we remember Perl, Perl has their spec fixed fast in earlier version while Perl 6 is a bit slow.
>
> It's not just age.
>
> - How complex is the product?
> - How many people have control over the specification?
> - How many people have control over the reference implementation?
> - How many hours a week are these people working on it?
> - Does the version numbering system make sense when compared with ours?
>
>> I am not sure what is left in the version 1.0, but like an ordinary project it should have some timeline, or something left to do.
> <snip>
>
> Lots of things left to do if you haven't noticed.
>
> Stewart.
> 

Boris Wang wrote:
> In addition, reference return type, variable template parameter, etc.

These are not must-have features for D 1.0



-- 
Tomasz Stachowiak  /+ a.k.a. h3r3tic +/

The reference return type , should be must-have feature for D 1.0.

"Tom S" <h3r3tic@remove.mat.uni.torun.pl> ??????:e7oc3h$261t$1@digitaldaemon.com...
> Boris Wang wrote:
>> In addition, reference return type, variable template parameter, etc.
>
> These are not must-have features for D 1.0
>
>
>
> -- 
> Tomasz Stachowiak  /+ a.k.a. h3r3tic +/
> 

Boris Wang wrote:
> In addition, reference return type, variable template parameter, etc.
> 
> The D is far from the 1.0 mile stone.
> 
> It's good time for us to have a rest, may be one years, two years...,  :(

The problem is, you cannot develop a stable 1.0 library until you have a  stable 1.0 language. (Important example: template container classes can't be standardised until we know how good the implicit function template instantiation will be by 1.0).
Secondly, features such as array literals, variable template parameters, etc, have been stated to be a post-1.0 feature.


> 
> "Stewart Gordon" <smjg_1998@yahoo.com> ??????:e7h24l$5p6$1@digitaldaemon.com...
>> sailormoontw wrote:
>>> Hello:
>>>
>>> I have read the Sinbad forum, which it's a Ogre3D in D. The author thinks with no 1.0 spec, it discourages them from making such a project. Ogre3D is nice and currently is one of good free DirectX wrappers. If Ogre3D can have the D version. I think it's a nice thing to the D community.
>> If you want to write a D version of Ogre3D, then I for one am not going
>> to stop you.
>>
>>> And...I am just curious, after 5 years, when will the 1.0 of D be out??
>> I think we should cross this bridge when we get to it.
>>
>> http://www.digitalmars.com/d/archives/digitalmars/D/35929.html
>>
>>> Squirrel is a 2 years old language, and it already hits 2.1. And we remember Perl, Perl has their spec fixed fast in earlier version while Perl 6 is a bit slow.
>> It's not just age.
>>
>> - How complex is the product?
>> - How many people have control over the specification?
>> - How many people have control over the reference implementation?
>> - How many hours a week are these people working on it?
>> - Does the version numbering system make sense when compared with ours?
>>
>>> I am not sure what is left in the version 1.0, but like an ordinary project it should have some timeline, or something left to do.
>> <snip>
>>
>> Lots of things left to do if you haven't noticed.
>>
>> Stewart.
>>
> 
>