Hi,

I am watching this newsgroup everyday and it's like a drug but I can see  so many discussions about implementation, performances, ...
The problem is as D user I just want a good language and if the first implementation is not very fast I don't give a f..
It seems your are talking about what could be done but why don't you just take in account current issues.
If you look a few posts before mine you could see for instance :

'package' and access from subpackages.., it seems that there are some limitations to the package concept..

Why don't developpers focus on this ?

I know that it's important to discuss theory but won't it be better to provide something consistent ?

And when you discuss like this, it seems that nothing happens in terms of development. For instance GDC compiler doesn't evolve quickly...
I don't see any changes in DMD compiler either.

Vincent Richomme Wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> I am watching this newsgroup everyday and it's like a drug but I can see
>   so many discussions about implementation, performances, ...
> The problem is as D user I just want a good language and if the first
> implementation is not very fast I don't give a f..
> It seems your are talking about what could be done but why don't you
> just take in account current issues.
> If you look a few posts before mine you could see for instance :
> 
> 'package' and access from subpackages.., it seems that there are some limitations to the package concept..
> 
> Why don't developpers focus on this ?
> 
> I know that it's important to discuss theory but won't it be better to provide something consistent ?
> 
> And when you discuss like this, it seems that nothing happens in terms
> of development. For instance GDC compiler doesn't evolve quickly...
> I don't see any changes in DMD compiler either.

this is rich. no pun intended. i've seen my share of pearls on the usenet. but this one deserves to be framed and hanged by my desk.

so we have monsieur leech here. he's not contributing any code bug reports or even posts. his grand total of posts is six. but in fairness they include this chef d'oeuvre. but mind you he is watching! guess we gotta be grateful for that. so grateful that we should change preference on the subjects we choose to discuss. we now have to chat about packages and stuff whether or not we know or care about'em. then make proposals. then have walt implement them pronto. that way monsieur leech can continue enjoying using the language and reading the newsgroup. of course posting on the subject of packages would be too much effort for monsieur leech. he'd rather just watch.

but wait, monsieur leech has even more good advice. he don't see any changes in the dmd compiler. sorry walt. your best ain't good enuff for monsieur leech. guess the monthly releases, wads of bugfixes with each of'em and the neckbreaking evolution of d2 don't count.

now if you'll excuse me. i have to prepare a post on the subpackage access subject.

On Fri, 29 Aug 2008 18:49:50 +0400, Vincent Richomme <forumer@smartmobili.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I am watching this newsgroup everyday and it's like a drug but I can see   so many discussions about implementation, performances, ...
> The problem is as D user I just want a good language and if the first implementation is not very fast I don't give a f..
> It seems your are talking about what could be done but why don't you just take in account current issues.
> If you look a few posts before mine you could see for instance :
>
> 'package' and access from subpackages.., it seems that there are some limitations to the package concept..
>
> Why don't developpers focus on this ?
>

It's a problem, people see and understand, but there is nothing else we can do.

> I know that it's important to discuss theory but won't it be better to provide something consistent ?
>

One of the reason holywars are so popular because everyone has its own "religion", he is comfortable with it and sure that he is absolutely right. There is a large place for debate. :)

> And when you discuss like this, it seems that nothing happens in terms of development. For instance GDC compiler doesn't evolve quickly...
> I don't see any changes in DMD compiler either.
>
>

These are mostly single-person projects and it looks like people are somewhat unwanted there.
OTOH, llvmdc is having great progress in development, more open and more promising.

Denis Koroskin wrote:
> On Fri, 29 Aug 2008 18:49:50 +0400, Vincent Richomme <forumer@smartmobili.com> wrote:
> 
>> Hi,
>>
>> I am watching this newsgroup everyday and it's like a drug but I can see   so many discussions about implementation, performances, ...
>> The problem is as D user I just want a good language and if the first implementation is not very fast I don't give a f..
>> It seems your are talking about what could be done but why don't you just take in account current issues.
>> If you look a few posts before mine you could see for instance :
>>
>> 'package' and access from subpackages.., it seems that there are some limitations to the package concept..
>>
>> Why don't developpers focus on this ?
>>
> 
> It's a problem, people see and understand, but there is nothing else we can do.

See, understand, and agree. But people sitting around and agreeing doesn't take as much space as people sitting around and arguing.

Reply to Christopher,

> Denis Koroskin wrote:
> 
>> On Fri, 29 Aug 2008 18:49:50 +0400, Vincent Richomme
>> <forumer@smartmobili.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> I am watching this newsgroup everyday and it's like a drug but I can
>>> see   so many discussions about implementation, performances, ...
>>> The problem is as D user I just want a good language and if the
>>> first
>>> implementation is not very fast I don't give a f..
>>> It seems your are talking about what could be done but why don't you
>>> just take in account current issues.
>>> If you look a few posts before mine you could see for instance :
>>> 'package' and access from subpackages.., it seems that there are
>>> some limitations to the package concept..
>>> 
>>> Why don't developpers focus on this ?
>>> 
>> It's a problem, people see and understand, but there is nothing else
>> we can do.
>> 
> See, understand, and agree. But people sitting around and agreeing
> doesn't take as much space as people sitting around and arguing.
> 

We agree on many things but when we can't change DMD all we have left is to argue over the details (some of us think this is "fun")

<g>

BCS wrote:
> We agree on many things but when we can't change DMD all we have left is to argue over the details (some of us think this is "fun")

You can always change gdc, which is based on dmd, to try things out.

superdan a écrit :
> Vincent Richomme Wrote:
> 
> this is rich. no pun intended. i've seen my share of pearls on the usenet. but this one deserves to be framed and hanged by my desk.
> 
he's not contributing any code bug reports or even posts.
My contribution : a D compiler for Windows CE/Pocket PC
http://www.smartmobili.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=38&Itemid=41

his grand total of posts is six.
Now it's 7


but in fairness they include this chef d'oeuvre. but mind you he is watching!
guess we gotta be grateful for that.
so grateful that we should change preference on the subjects we choose to discuss.
we now have to chat about packages and stuff whether or not we know or care about'em.
then make proposals. then have walt implement them pronto.
that way monsieur leech can continue enjoying using the language and reading the newsgroup.
of course posting on the subject of packages would be too much effort for monsieur leech.
he'd rather just watch.
> 
> but wait, monsieur leech has even more good advice. he don't see any changes in the dmd compiler. sorry walt. your best ain't good enuff for monsieur leech. guess the monthly releases, wads of bugfixes with each of'em and the neckbreaking evolution of d2 don't count.
Sorry but actually I am watching GDC compiler and I don't know enough about dmd.

> 
> now if you'll excuse me. i have to prepare a post on the subpackage access subject.
Please don't lose your time with monsieur leech ;-)

"Walter Bright" <newshound1@digitalmars.com> wrote in message news:g9a7eg$1k9b$3@digitalmars.com...
> BCS wrote:
>> We agree on many things but when we can't change DMD all we have left is to argue over the details (some of us think this is "fun")
>
> You can always change gdc, which is based on dmd, to try things out.

Mucking around with GCC is an absolute mess (doubly true on windows). Not that I'm disagreeing with you, though. FWIW, a D compiler written in a better language (like D!) would be great for trying things out, but I suppose that's just stating the obvious ;)  (BTW, What is LLVM written in? C++, I assume? Haven't really had a chance to look into it yet.)

Nick Sabalausky wrote:
> "Walter Bright" <newshound1@digitalmars.com> wrote in message news:g9a7eg$1k9b$3@digitalmars.com...
>> BCS wrote:
>>> We agree on many things but when we can't change DMD all we have left is to argue over the details (some of us think this is "fun")
>> You can always change gdc, which is based on dmd, to try things out.
> 
> Mucking around with GCC is an absolute mess (doubly true on windows). Not that I'm disagreeing with you, though. FWIW, a D compiler written in a better language (like D!) would be great for trying things out, but I suppose that's just stating the obvious ;)  (BTW, What is LLVM written in? C++, I assume? Haven't really had a chance to look into it yet.) 

LLVM is written in a tasteful subset of C++. That's how its writers put it, at least.

Vincent Richomme Wrote:

> superdan a écrit :
> > Vincent Richomme Wrote:
> > 
> > this is rich. no pun intended. i've seen my share of pearls on the usenet. but this one deserves to be framed and hanged by my desk.
> > 
> he's not contributing any code bug reports or even posts.
> My contribution : a D compiler for Windows CE/Pocket PC
> http://www.smartmobili.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=38&Itemid=41

now yer talkin'. i could even understand it tho mon francais est pire.

> his grand total of posts is six.
> Now it's 7
> 
> 
> but in fairness they include this chef d'oeuvre. but mind you he is
> watching!
> guess we gotta be grateful for that.
> so grateful that we should change preference on the subjects we choose
> to discuss.
> we now have to chat about packages and stuff whether or not we know or
> care about'em.
> then make proposals. then have walt implement them pronto.
> that way monsieur leech can continue enjoying using the language and
> reading the newsgroup.
> of course posting on the subject of packages would be too much effort
> for monsieur leech.
> he'd rather just watch.
> > 
> > but wait, monsieur leech has even more good advice. he don't see any changes in the dmd compiler. sorry walt. your best ain't good enuff for monsieur leech. guess the monthly releases, wads of bugfixes with each of'em and the neckbreaking evolution of d2 don't count.
> Sorry but actually I am watching GDC compiler and I don't know enough about dmd.

simple guideline. dunno, dun talk. same applies to knowledge of stl eh.

> > now if you'll excuse me. i have to prepare a post on the subpackage access subject.
> Please don't lose your time with monsieur leech ;-)

glad we got each other's point. thanks for writin'.