On Thursday, 9 January 2014 at 07:45:09 UTC, Kira Backes wrote:
So, what I actually wanted to ask, which part/project do you
think mostly needs contribution?
Hello,
Given the low frequency of issue reports on some projects, I've
definitely noticed a new face in the D ecosystem. I've thought
about this problem a little bit as well.
The D documentation on this page?
For the most part, I've been satisfied with D documentation on
the official website. My only general gripe is that there are
many outdated pages – sometimes to the point of irrelevance. This
can confuse people, given it is on the official website and not
marked as outdated. For example: http://dlang.org/safed.html
confused me the other day. I did not know it had evolved into
@safe.
Mono-D (I’ll be using that, already contributed to an issue)?
Mono-D is by far my favorite IDE for D. It is cross-platform,
free as in speech/beer, and supports DUB package files.
Unfortunately, there are a lot of unreported issues or
non-reproducable issues which tends to happen when a development
team is small. I believe Mono-D and D_Parser are written in C#
and not D though. One thing that may be possible and worth doing
in the future is using DCD (mentioned later) with Mono-D and
combining efforts. Though that is more of a major undertaking.
DUB?
Sönke is moving along pretty quickly with DUB. I would say having
a well fleshed out tutorial or more examples could do it well
though.
More tutorials on a seperate blog?
A lot of D language tutorials and informational resources pander
to C++ programmers. I think that we should be more focused on
attracting new users or perhaps people who tend to use
interpreted languages. See: http://www.rustforrubyists.com/. A
lot of people would like a more performant, statically checked,
compiled language. D is expressive enough to intersect with a lot
of the use cases of a scripting language.
