On Fri, 22 Jan 2010 20:54:11 +0900, retard <r...@tard.com.invalid> wrote:
Fri, 22 Jan 2010 12:26:12 +0100, Lars T. Kyllingstad wrote:
Steve Teale wrote:
That this newsgroup was renamed digitalmars.d2. Probably > 80% of the
discussion here is on topics relating to the evolution of the language.
Don't get me wrong, as soon as D2 is stable, I'll be the first to
switch.
But where does the current discussion leave those of us who want to use
D and talk about the usage of what is the current mainstream core of
the language - 1.055 - if I understand the situation correctly? That
should be digitalmars.D.
If there was discussion about how good it was that the various flavors
of the language were getting in sync, and on idiom, and on cool D
programming techniques, and on explanation, I'm sure the newsgroup
would pull more people in.
As it is, the uncommitted with some interest in D visit occasionally,
and leave with the same old, same old feeling.
Let's try to turn D into a really active living language, not some
vague future possibility. Perception is everything!
Well, seeing as D2 is supposed to be finished in only a couple of
months, we should in my opinion stop referring to it as D2, and just
call it D. If there is need for separate newsgroups, they should be
called digitalmars.d1 and digitalmars.d, not digitalmars.d and
digitalmars.d2.
After all, when we speak of Java, we don't usually mean Java 1.1.
There is, however, definitely a need to rename the newsgroups. This
newsgroup should be called d.dev or something, and d.learn should
replace this one. This would most likely lead to more traffic and more
interesting discussions on the "learn" forum, with the added benefit of
not scaring away newbies with the sometimes rather heated debates going
on here.
Hmm http://www.scala-lang.org/node/199
D <-> scala
D.announce <-> scala.announce
D.learn <-> scala.users
D.{dtl,dwt,ide,debugger} <-> scala.tools
nothing <-> scala.debate
nothing <-> scala.internals
internals here.
http://lists.puremagic.com/mailman/listinfo/dmd-internals
I don't think D requires a D.academic for papers since probably no
postgraduate level paper has ever been written about D. A group for
discussing compiler/language internals and debate would be useful though.
