February 02, 2018
On Friday, 2 February 2018 at 15:06:35 UTC, Benny wrote:
> HTTP:

If you are focusing on Http then yah Go is probably the better choice, it looks like it is entire geared towards http development. I wouldn't use D for http just like I wouldn't use C++ for http.
February 02, 2018
>> When i hear Go, you hear uniformal, fast, simple syntax language.
>> When i hear Rust, you hear safe, manual memory management.
>> When i hear D, you hear ... ... ... ...

I usually hear awesome meta-programming and ranges.

I think D community had put lot of effort in making these things work because (1) these are cool (2) increases expressive power. Unfortunately at the detriment of tooling and libraries.

I think we should put a stop to adding new features in D2 at some point and focus on stability, libraries and tools.

Can't wait to see how the road map looks like for 18H1.


February 02, 2018
On Friday, 2 February 2018 at 21:09:20 UTC, Rubn wrote:
> On Friday, 2 February 2018 at 15:06:35 UTC, Benny wrote:
>> HTTP:
>
> If you are focusing on Http then yah Go is probably the better choice, it looks like it is entire geared towards http development. I wouldn't use D for http just like I wouldn't use C++ for http.

D can equally do HTTP in whatever way Go does it. It appears most core contributors are not into networking or web services so they may not see it as a blocker. Its more of an ecosystem issue and not a language issue.

Even with D, we have libraries like request (http://code.dlang.org/packages/requests) for HTTP/FTP. Its does support http2 yet though but its enough for all my HTTP needs for now.

We also have vibe.d which I don't get the point which saying it might be abandoned is not a reason to ignore it as useful or enough. I've seen several people here submitting pull requests in every release of it. Considering the size of this community (in my estimation), vibe.d is well supported. It does more than what express for NodeJS does on its own.

There in also an effort to make D work on Alpine Linux which is very common for packaging applications into lightweight docker containers. Support for D in the cloud also require some amount of work since none of them support D SDKs.

The Internet and the web is continuously growing and communication protocols are quite significant in the change.




February 02, 2018
On Friday, 2 February 2018 at 23:49:14 UTC, aberba wrote:
> On Friday, 2 February 2018 at 21:09:20 UTC, Rubn wrote:
>> [...]
>
> D can equally do HTTP in whatever way Go does it. It appears most core contributors are not into networking or web services so they may not see it as a blocker. Its more of an ecosystem issue and not a language issue.
>
> [...]

Now I can't fix my statement ... The statement doesn't make sense to me.
February 03, 2018
On Friday, 2 February 2018 at 23:49:14 UTC, aberba wrote:
> It appears most core contributors are not into networking or web services so they may not see it as a blocker.

I do tons of HTTP stuff in D; to me it is a solved problem. Though I haven't implemented http2 since I don't need it; http 1.1 has much better compatibility (and will for many years to come) and performs plenty well enough for API client use, and server use is handled behind a production server anyway, so it works quite well.

A http2 client might be worth doing someday, but right now there's just no pressing need, even using http resources every day.
February 03, 2018
On Saturday, 3 February 2018 at 00:11:06 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
> On Friday, 2 February 2018 at 23:49:14 UTC, aberba wrote:
>> It appears most core contributors are not into networking or web services so they may not see it as a blocker.
>
> I do tons of HTTP stuff in D; to me it is a solved problem. Though I haven't implemented http2 since I don't need it; http 1.1 has much better compatibility (and will for many years to come) and performs plenty well enough for API client use, and server use is handled behind a production server anyway, so it works quite well.
>
> A http2 client might be worth doing someday, but right now there's just no pressing need, even using http resources every day.

Yeah. I do know you're on of the few guys into web services.
February 03, 2018
On Friday, 2 February 2018 at 15:06:35 UTC, Benny wrote:
>
> I am personally confused with D's message.

I think that point hits the cause of your problem with D (along with your need to 'choose' something over 'something' else).

Stop looking for the meaning of D .. and start experiencing it.
(there is no meaning...to anything!)

Stop comparing D to other things, and just enjoy what it has to offer.
(tribalism not cool!)

And btw. one persons technical justification for using x, is another persons technical justification for not using x.

Plenty of experienced programmers  (who never used D before) now enjoy using D, even if they still have to program in other languages...in order to earn a living.

Too many corporations have big investments in other languages. Don't expect D to compete here anytime soon. That is the nature of business. If D is to take off anywhere, it will be in the open source community, and startups - not a google or facebook, and certainly never microsoft.

D has a lot of good and interesting things to offer to the world of software development, including an amazing, reasonably efficient standard library (with support from the compiler). It also supports all major platforms that matter (although it's hard to argue that windows 32bit 'matters' ;-). And there is no corporate backer making this all happen. It's just people who want to build something great, and give up their time to do it.

D has the benefit of having a compiler expert, and an algorithm expert in the core team. The advantage from this cannot be underestimated (which is why many are willing to look the other way when it comes to lack of significant management skills ;-)    ..and I'd rather it that way, than the other way (i.e great managers, who don't understand a thing). Both would be nice.. but who has that?

But D is on a road trip...it's not at its destination (I'm not sure it even knows - or cares - where its going ;-)

Just enjoy the road trip! Or jump out. It's entirely your choice.

But the road trip will continue, and those on it, will keep enjoying new sights...


February 03, 2018
On Friday, 2 February 2018 at 15:06:35 UTC, Benny wrote:
>
> Other languages have slogans, they have selling points.
>
> When i hear Go, you hear uniformal, fast, simple syntax language.
> When i hear Rust, you hear safe, manual memory management.
> When i hear D, you hear ... ... ... ...
>

When i hear D, you hear:

"The freedom to program, the way you want".

(if you listen carefully..then you'll hear it)

February 02, 2018
On 2/2/2018 7:06 AM, Benny wrote:
> Other languages have slogans, they have selling points.
> 
> When i hear Go, you hear uniformal, fast, simple syntax language.
> When i hear Rust, you hear safe, manual memory management.
> When i hear D, you hear ... ... ... ...

                          Fast code, fast
February 03, 2018
On Saturday, 3 February 2018 at 01:52:04 UTC, psychoticRabbit wrote:
> On Friday, 2 February 2018 at 15:06:35 UTC, Benny wrote:
>>
>> I am personally confused with D's message.
>
> I think that point hits the cause of your problem with D (along with your need to 'choose' something over 'something' else).
>
> Stop looking for the meaning of D .. and start experiencing it.
> (there is no meaning...to anything!)
>
> Stop comparing D to other things, and just enjoy what it has to offer.
> (tribalism not cool!)
>
> And btw. one persons technical justification for using x, is another persons technical justification for not using x.
>
> Plenty of experienced programmers  (who never used D before) now enjoy using D, even if they still have to program in other languages...in order to earn a living.
>
> Too many corporations have big investments in other languages. Don't expect D to compete here anytime soon. That is the nature of business. If D is to take off anywhere, it will be in the open source community, and startups - not a google or facebook, and certainly never microsoft.
>
> D has a lot of good and interesting things to offer to the world of software development, including an amazing, reasonably efficient standard library (with support from the compiler). It also supports all major platforms that matter (although it's hard to argue that windows 32bit 'matters' ;-). And there is no corporate backer making this all happen. It's just people who want to build something great, and give up their time to do it.
>
> D has the benefit of having a compiler expert, and an algorithm expert in the core team. The advantage from this cannot be underestimated (which is why many are willing to look the other way when it comes to lack of significant management skills ;-)
>   ..and I'd rather it that way, than the other way (i.e great managers, who don't understand a thing). Both would be nice.. but who has that?

Probably the best response to what he wrote and to similar sentiments expressed by others over the years, but I'll add one caveat: it has been mentioned here that D has been used a little by a few teams at both Facebook and Microsoft, dunno about Google.  Though as you said, no sign that they'll embrace it much more, and probably better to have it adopted at many more smaller places.

> But D is on a road trip...it's not at its destination (I'm not sure it even knows - or cares - where its going ;-)
>
> Just enjoy the road trip! Or jump out. It's entirely your choice.
>
> But the road trip will continue, and those on it, will keep enjoying new sights...

According to Linus, it is impossible to know your destination if your scope is wide enough, such as a general-purpose programming language or an OS kernel, as this is what he said in response to a question about whether linux could still be designed at the scale it reached 16 years ago:

"I will go further and claim that _no_ major software project that has
been successful in a general marketplace (as opposed to niches) has ever
gone through those nice lifecycles they tell you about in CompSci classes.
Have you _ever_ heard of a project that actually started off with trying
to figure out what it should do, a rigorous design phase, and a
implementation phase?

Dream on.

Software evolves. It isn't designed. The only question is how strictly you
_control_ the evolution, and how open you are to external sources of
mutations.

And too much control of the evolution will kill you. Inevitably, and
without fail. Always. In biology, and in software.

Amen."
http://yarchive.net/comp/evolution.html