yigal chripun Wrote: > Kagamin Wrote: > > > yigal chripun Wrote: > > > > > there is no defined system for the development of D. even MS has a well > > > defined plan for their .net platform. where's the plan for D? where the > > > process to define that plan? > > > Either you need to have a plan or you need to have a community driven > > > process (Java JSRs, Python PEPs). > > > > How the development plan relates to tango? There's a plan to port tango to > > D2, though it proved to be troublesome. And I think, tango is supposed to > > be community driven. > > the lack of proper planning relates to everything: > blocking bugs that affect tango for D2, licensing issues - everyone has his > own prefered license and there is no central body to manage that (there is a > GOOD reason why all GNU code is copyrighted by the FSF), no plan as to what > features will be implemented, how and when (latest example - Bartosz' > concurrency design for D which was rejected by Andrei), lack of planning for > the standard library user APIs - Andrei rewrote half of phobos - with no > regard for integration efforts with tango, and so forth. > > It really doesn't matter how good a programmer Andrei is if there is no > consideration for the end user in his code. It doesn't matter how fast a car > you can build if it doesn't fit on the standard state roads. > D feels like patient zero of NIH syndrom where everything is a one man show. > no fucking amount of colaboration is even taken into account. > > The only person here that undersands this is Don and nobody listens to him, > so fucking what if he needs to copy-paste all his code to support the > tango-phobos dichotomy, right? >
d00d. cussin's pathetic. don't suit ya. wut's yer real problem?
