On Monday, 8 June 2020 at 19:45:59 UTC, Vinod K Chandran wrote:
> On Sunday, 7 June 2020 at 22:22:16 UTC, Per Nordlöw wrote:
>
>>
>> Does Microsofts new language have a name?
>
> I read that they started using Rust.

Where are they using it?

On Tuesday, 9 June 2020 at 05:33:35 UTC, Liu wrote:
> On Monday, 8 June 2020 at 19:45:59 UTC, Vinod K Chandran wrote:
>> On Sunday, 7 June 2020 at 22:22:16 UTC, Per Nordlöw wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Does Microsofts new language have a name?
>>
>> I read that they started using Rust.
>
> Where are they using it?

Already mentioned on my previous reply, namely VSCode, Azure IoT, official UWP/WinRT projection (alongside JS, .NET, Python and C++), and possibly a future version of Azure Sphere.

On Tuesday, 9 June 2020 at 05:33:35 UTC, Liu wrote:
>
> Where are they using it?

See this Link.
https://msrc-blog.microsoft.com/2019/11/07/using-rust-in-windows/

On Monday, 8 June 2020 at 19:45:59 UTC, Vinod K Chandran wrote:
> On Sunday, 7 June 2020 at 22:22:16 UTC, Per Nordlöw wrote:
>
>>
>> Does Microsofts new language have a name?
>
> I read that they started using Rust.

where?

On Tuesday, 9 June 2020 at 17:38:15 UTC, Liu wrote:
> On Monday, 8 June 2020 at 19:45:59 UTC, Vinod K Chandran wrote:
>> On Sunday, 7 June 2020 at 22:22:16 UTC, Per Nordlöw wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Does Microsofts new language have a name?
>>
>> I read that they started using Rust.
>
> where?

As stated earlier in this thread, the project is called Verona.

At the same time Microsoft is starting use Rust as well.

On Sunday, 7 June 2020 at 21:42:12 UTC, Jason wrote:
> It seems every company would rather create a new language instead of adopting one. That's one reason why D will never be "chosen" by an organization. Instead, once the major contributors either retire or lose interest, D will finally die instead of linger in its current comatose state.

Python was created by a single person and maintained by a community.
It has been adopted by Anaconda Inc, with contributions from teams
at Google (Tensorflow) and Facebook. (Pyre)

Python succeeded because data scientists love it and it's easy to
learn. Perhaps D could go a similar route, by interfacing with
Pandas dataframes and NumPy arrays.

On Tuesday, 9 June 2020 at 19:03:50 UTC, James Lu wrote:
> [snip]
>
> Python succeeded because data scientists love it and it's easy to
> learn. Perhaps D could go a similar route, by interfacing with
> Pandas dataframes and NumPy arrays.

It is already possible to interface between D and Python [1]. Further, mir has a buffer protocol implementation [2]. It would make for a good blog post to provide an example of how to use these two together.

[1] https://pyd.readthedocs.io/en/latest/index.html
[2] http://mir-algorithm.libmir.org/mir_ndslice_connect_cpython.html

On Sunday, 7 June 2020 at 21:32:49 UTC, IGotD- wrote:
> On Sunday, 7 June 2020 at 20:46:36 UTC, Vinod K Chandran wrote:
>> Why didn't Micro Soft take D as their new language? If they wanted a better C, D would have been better than Rust.
>
> Because Microsoft copies technologies and makes an in house version of it. Microsoft did it with Java and called it J++. I expect that Microsoft will come with a Rust clone soon, we know that they have already started working on that.

After copying J++ and being sued, they made C#.

On Sunday, 7 June 2020 at 21:42:12 UTC, Jason wrote:
> On Sunday, 7 June 2020 at 21:32:49 UTC, IGotD- wrote:
>> On Sunday, 7 June 2020 at 20:46:36 UTC, Vinod K Chandran wrote:
>>> Why didn't Micro Soft take D as their new language? If they wanted a better C, D would have been better than Rust.
>>
>> Because Microsoft copies technologies and makes an in house version of it. Microsoft did it with Java and called it J++. I expect that Microsoft will come with a Rust clone soon, we know that they have already started working on that.
>>
>> Why didn't they clone D? Maybe it was too close to C++ and C#, the extra work wasn't worth it. Maybe D was too fringe for Microsoft to care.
>
> It seems every company would rather create a new language instead of adopting one. That's one reason why D will never be "chosen" by an organization. Instead, once the major contributors either retire or lose interest, D will finally die instead of linger in its current comatose state.
>
> RIP

In 1958 the average lifespan of a company listed on the S&P 500 was 61 years.  In 2016 it was less than 18 years.  McKinsey believed then that by 2027 75% of companies listed at that time will have disappeared.

https://www.imd.org/research-knowledge/articles/why-you-will-probably-live-longer-than-most-big-companies/

What happens to a language that is dominated by the sponsorship of a single company if the company disappears?  It is possible for it to survive, but it's going to be quite disruptive if the company support disappears over quite a short period of time.

Google, for example, has a big cash pile.  But it's core business is advertising and according to eBay personalised adverts cost 10x more, but are only 30% more effective.  What do you suppose is going to happen to advertising spend over the next twenty years should people become less materialistic, have less disposable income and decide that maybe their core product isn't worth what they currently do ?  Let's not discuss the appeal of such a company to the most talented engineers and how that might change.

A language that is vital without large cash infusions from a single sponsor is really much more able to survive adverse conditions.  It's also better from that point of view if the companies that do use it are spread across a range of domains and stages of the process of production.

D does have plenty of corporate users:
https://dlang.org/orgs-using-d.html

We are one of them, and I am aiming to hire 20 people to write D over the next year or two.



Laeeth

On Wednesday, 10 June 2020 at 01:29:54 UTC, James Lu wrote:
> On Sunday, 7 June 2020 at 21:32:49 UTC, IGotD- wrote:
>> On Sunday, 7 June 2020 at 20:46:36 UTC, Vinod K Chandran wrote:
>>> Why didn't Micro Soft take D as their new language? If they wanted a better C, D would have been better than Rust.
>>
>> Because Microsoft copies technologies and makes an in house version of it. Microsoft did it with Java and called it J++. I expect that Microsoft will come with a Rust clone soon, we know that they have already started working on that.
>
> After copying J++ and being sued, they made C#.

And nowadays they are one of OpenJDK contributors, work alongside Red-Hat on VSCode Java support and their Azure Java SDKs have feature parity with .NET.

I am still waiting for the Hammer of Justice to sledge Google with its Android Java flavour of the month.