On Tuesday, 9 May 2023 at 12:27:30 UTC, FeepingCreature wrote:
To be honest, this has always been my take as well.
On Tuesday, 9 May 2023 at 15:46:12 UTC, Paul Backus wrote:
I basically agree with this
I feel if I was understood, only people with (at least) one foot
out the door would agree easily.
As it stands *anytime* *anyone* says "I want to help D" in the
discord, I and several others basically go out of our way to
dissuade that notion; *that's damning* to the long-term health of
the language. Thats not changing on my end, Im practicing what I
preach, minor political changes won't convince me. Can anyone
tell me with a straight face that the last guy to say "Hi im new,
d lacks a crypto lib in the std, is that something I could help
with?" shouldn't have been told to avoid that like the plague?
---
Michael Malice has this concept of "Nancy Pelosi 4th favorite ice
cream"; every night she has a pint of icecream, 90% of the time
she picks her favorite and so on.
She hasn't eaten her 4th favorite icecream in 3 years, is she
lying?
(nancy says she is for freedom, but when asked if she would
legalize meth/ legalize nukes/ get rid of all taxes, *said no
everytime*)
I think this leads to a "blunt fact" you can only have so many
principles. Every official D codebase uses the official style
guide, cares about the long-term vision, and who knows what other
unstated requirements.
I believe "coherent vision" must be discarded for some part of
the process.
"Management" does not always mean "telling people what to do".
Sometimes (often!) it means removing roadblocks and bottlenecks
that get in the way of people doing what they already want to
do.
The way I read the main post is not "We are changing our
fundamental values to be more flexible" it's more "I'm making an
effort to communicate the team's vision better". I don't believe
this issue is that; I hear the team's vision very very loudly, I
could tell you a few reasons why the std won't get new data
structures this decade(much less the ones I would suggest). It's
not a lack of communication of them to me, Im just willing to
summarize "we can't make data structures, you should use @nogc
@live and @safe, your code isn't our style, allocators are
coming" to "no".
D seems to plan on telling people what's acceptable at exactly
the same rate, for the foreseeable future; I see nothing that
would make anything I write acceptable to it.
(Honestly, maybe 80% of the time when I've seen "D needs better
management", it has been code for "D management didn't like my
proposal.")
Yes, d needs better management because d didn't like my proposal.
I mean "anarchic" when I ask for a redesign of std.experimental.
I don't see a future healthy growth of the language when any
member of the dev team has a say on everything.
I see no shuffling of decision-making capabilities that would
resolve the issues.
---
When I say "d has a community of meta-programming crazed
iconoclasts" and "don't herd cats"; I do mean the community,
genius doesn't necessarily play nice with others or lead people
to work *for free* with poor working conditions. I'm not really
saying nice things about myself or the other people who left or
are unwilling to contribute for whatever reason. But I would
suggest the solution to courting the iconoclastic elements isn't
with something tested in corporate culture, corporations
generally pay to have people tolerate their demands, D must
compete with the freedom of doing your own project.
