IMO this should be the priority: 1. blockers (things that can't be worked around at all or not without jumping through a lot of hoops) 2. everything else
dmd still doesn't support shared libraries on OSX (cf https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=12190) That prevents a whole category of use cases (eg D plugins called from C++ or from D) On Sat, Mar 10, 2018 at 8:06 PM, Nick Sabalausky (Abscissa) via Digitalmars-d-announce <digitalmars-d-announce@puremagic.com> wrote: > On 03/10/2018 05:47 AM, Dylan Graham wrote: >> >> On Saturday, 10 March 2018 at 10:05:49 UTC, rumbu wrote: >>> >>> >>> According to the State of D Survey, 71% of the respondents don't care >>> about betterC. Why is betterC on the priority list? >> >> >> Yeah. Why should D worry about tying itself into C when it can't even >> interface with itself through DLLs? > > > First of all, betterC is about far more than interfacing with C. In fact, > interop with C isn't really what betterC is about at all - that's a separate > aspect of the language. (And those C/C++ users who still haven't come to D - > for many of them the holdout is *because* of the issues betterC aims to > address. Make no mistake, for all the stockholm syndrome in the C and C++ > worlds, there *are* a lot people openly wanting to jump ship but don't have > a sufficient option yet. Heck, *I'm* a C/C++ -> D convert.) > > But more importantly: > > The D language itself is specifically designed and intended to be > multi-purpose. Because of that, D users (and potential D users) are *highly* > diverse. Everybody here has their own use-cases, their own needs and > priorities, and their own list of things they want fixed yesterday. > > In a group this diverse, there just simply *isn't* much on the D wishlist > that's crucially important to a *majority*, because we all need completely > different things. > > Personally, better DLL support have little to no impact on me. Obviously it > does for you, and I sympathise. Some of the things most important to me for > D to improve you probably wouldn't care one bit about - and that's ok. We > work on different sorts of things. > > Improved betterC is something I would find very nice if I ever have time or > opportunity to get back into embedded software. But outside of that, yea, it > doesn't impact me much more than it does for you. > > But here's the rub: In this crowd here, probably far more than most > languages, we all have such wildly varying needs that 29% *is* what > qualifies as significant around here. Most wishlist items are going to have > similarly non-majority numbers. And they have to pick *something* to focus > on. Luckily, as the vision document clearly states, there are *several* such > "somethings" the dlang foundation is committing to working on.