Well, I noticed that this is being done, which is great.  However, it's been done using http-equiv Refresh redirects.  This is not going to improve Google PageRanks.  Really those redirects need to be 301 results coming from Apache.

Easiest way to do this is with an .htaccess file or in httpd.conf.  It can be done with Redirect or RewriteEngine/RewriteRule.  Here's an example:

RewriteRule ^d/(phobos/.*)$ d/2.0/$1 [NS,L,R=301]
RewriteRule ^d/([^/]+\.html$ d/2.0/$1 [NS,L,R=301]

Or something similar.  Just my suggestion to maintain as much ranking and relevance for current pages as possible.

-[Unknown]


Unknown W. Brackets wrote:
> Aha, I thought that was somewhere... but couldn't find it.  I touched on this briefly.  It also represents problems as far as SEO (something that could be improved on D's pages.)
> 
> For example, the fact that these two, entirely separate in Google's eyes, URLs work is bad:
> 
> http://www.digitalmars.com/d/changelog.html
> http://digitalmars.com/d/changelog.html
> 
> In addition, really, all the pages within d/ should 301 redirect to 2.0/ so that 1.0 and 2.0 are each present in their pages' URLs.  This would make searching for documentation on a specific tree simpler and most likely improve relevancy.
> 
> But, this is more specific than I really wanted to get with the website's needs.  The important thing is making the decision to get the changes done, and taking the time to review who to work with on it.  Maybe an internal team of volunteers, maybe an outside agency.  This can't happen until responsibility is better dispersed...
> 
> As a side note, I work for a web company, and we use PHP primarily - which language I do like.  But it would be cool to see D eat its own dogfood here, and host the website on its own, lightweight webserver with D-coded dynamic pages.  This wouldn't be hard to write at all, and would really show the versatility of D (as well as efficiency, assuming it handled load well.)  Maybe not practically the best, though.
> 
> -[Unknown]
> 
> 
> Bill Baxter Wrote:
>> In terms of functionality, making the user-comments in-line would be a big help.  Most people don't notice the "comments" button at the top of each doc page, and obviously the comments on those external pages don't show up when you do a Ctrl-F find-on-page search.
> 

Unknown W. Brackets schrieb:
> For management, I'm really talking about D itself.  I'm mostly unconcerned about how people use D, as much as how D itself is developed and presented to them - I think that's what needs work, personally.
> 
> -[Unknown]
Yes I've recognized that :)
I just had the idea that you talked about developer Collaboration too... a bit hidden, behind the words...and I simply could not resist to say that current SCMs sux.
(not ashamed) Bjoern

Sorry, didn't mean to be patronizing, thought you might've skimmed the rest.

Actually, you're right.  I've had experience managing developers (as that's my current job in fact), and currently SCMs all seem to have their flaws.  At the same time, all of them make things easier than nothing at all.

-[Unknown]


Bjoern Wrote:
> Yes I've recognized that :)
> I just had the idea that you talked about developer Collaboration too...
> a bit hidden, behind the words...and I simply could not resist to say
> that current SCMs sux.
> (not ashamed) Bjoern

Unknown W. Brackets schrieb:
> Sorry, didn't mean to be patronizing, thought you might've skimmed the rest.
No problem, even if you mean it :)
> 
> Actually, you're right.  I've had experience managing developers (as that's my current job in fact), and currently SCMs all seem to have their flaws.  At the same time, all of them make things easier than nothing at all.
> 
> -[Unknown]
> 

It is not my intention to waste your time but I'm curious (enough) about your opinion regarding using a RDBMS as SCM working-horse.
Bjoern

Unknown W. Brackets wrote:
> http://www.unknownbrackets.com/tutorials/polishing-d

Now on Reddit:

http://reddit.com/r/programming/info/669pe/comments/

Well, I haven't heard a word.  I guess he figures he'll keep doing it himself.

Last night I hacked on Walnut some more; removed the block allocator crap, reorganized the parser file, made it handle for() and automatic semicolon insertion, as well as escape characters in strings.

Not much left to do before the parser is done; some tree shuffling and a few statements.

A question; how does one differentiate between an object literal and a code block in ECMAScript?

I find the following:

{ bob: "hello" }

Is this:
a) an object
b) a code block with a label, bob, referring to a statement only containing a string?

I can create more elaborate examples which could be either, and to be honest the best I can think to do is parse it as an Object literal unless we get an invalid token?





Unknown W. Brackets Wrote:
> Well, I noticed that this is being done, which is great.  However, it's been done using http-equiv Refresh redirects.  This is not going to improve Google PageRanks.  Really those redirects need to be 301 results coming from Apache.
> 
> Easiest way to do this is with an .htaccess file or in httpd.conf.  It can be done with Redirect or RewriteEngine/RewriteRule.  Here's an example:
> 
> RewriteRule ^d/(phobos/.*)$ d/2.0/$1 [NS,L,R=301]
> RewriteRule ^d/([^/]+\.html$ d/2.0/$1 [NS,L,R=301]
> 
> Or something similar.  Just my suggestion to maintain as much ranking and relevance for current pages as possible.
> 
> -[Unknown]

Daniel Lewis wrote:
> Well, I haven't heard a word.  I guess he figures he'll keep doing it himself.

Why don't you try emailing him directly.  He does have an email address.  And it's not that hard to find for someone as web savvy as you. ;-)

--bb

Bill Baxter wrote:
> Daniel Lewis wrote:
>> Well, I haven't heard a word.  I guess he figures he'll keep doing it himself.
> 
> Why don't you try emailing him directly.  He does have an email address.  And it's not that hard to find for someone as web savvy as you. ;-)

But let me guess at his reservations -- from what I understand, he has a system that works now and is mostly automated, generating most of the html automatically using ddoc.

So if I were Walter I'd be leery of the situation where someone spends a  week making a great website, drops it and a hundred files of whiz-bang PHP/CSS/perl/javascript code in my lap, and then disappears.  The good thing about the current system is that Walter understands it completely because he wrote it.  That means that when something goes wrong, or he urgently needs to make the D2.0 pages purple, he knows how.

So the question is: is there some way you can overhaul the website that won't force him to change his workflow?

At least I'm guessing that's what he'd want to know.  :-)

--bb

From memory, not looking at the spec, aren't code blocks always proceeded by function () or similar?

Example:

var f = function ()
{
label:
   "hello"
}

var o = {
   label: "hello"
};

I may be wrong.  But that's what I remember...

-[Unknown]


Daniel Lewis Wrote:

> 
> Well, I haven't heard a word.  I guess he figures he'll keep doing it himself.
> 
> Last night I hacked on Walnut some more; removed the block allocator crap, reorganized the parser file, made it handle for() and automatic semicolon insertion, as well as escape characters in strings.
> 
> Not much left to do before the parser is done; some tree shuffling and a few statements.
> 
> A question; how does one differentiate between an object literal and a code block in ECMAScript?
> 
> I find the following:
> 
> { bob: "hello" }
> 
> Is this:
> a) an object
> b) a code block with a label, bob, referring to a statement only containing a string?
> 
> I can create more elaborate examples which could be either, and to be honest the best I can think to do is parse it as an Object literal unless we get an invalid token?

Well, that would be silly.  I work for one of many companies that creates sites for people with the very specific intent that the client becomes able to manage the site (sans major updates) completely on their own with no programming knowledge.

This has been popular since like 2001 or something.  It's nothing new, a covered problem.

In any case, it's holding onto everything and wanting to be able to pick things up on any aspect that would limit D.  Sometimes you have to trust other people, and do things in a standard enough way that you won't deep fry if your trust is misplaced.

Sorry if I just keep repeating that....

-[Unknown]


Bill Baxter Wrote:
> But let me guess at his reservations -- from what I understand, he has a system that works now and is mostly automated, generating most of the html automatically using ddoc.
> 
> So if I were Walter I'd be leery of the situation where someone spends a
>   week making a great website, drops it and a hundred files of whiz-bang
> PHP/CSS/perl/javascript code in my lap, and then disappears.  The good
> thing about the current system is that Walter understands it completely
> because he wrote it.  That means that when something goes wrong, or he
> urgently needs to make the D2.0 pages purple, he knows how.
> 
> So the question is: is there some way you can overhaul the website that won't force him to change his workflow?
> 
> At least I'm guessing that's what he'd want to know.  :-)
> 
> --bb