On Mon, 18 Oct 2010 20:25:52 +0400, Fawzi Mohamed <fa...@gmx.ch> wrote:
On 18-ott-10, at 18:14, Denis Koroskin wrote:
On Mon, 18 Oct 2010 19:07:38 +0400, Don <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
Jeff Nowakowski wrote:
On 10/18/2010 04:59 AM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
Java was big long before it was open-sourced, and C# is big in spite
of the fact
that its main compiler isn't open source and the one that is (Mono)
is so far
behind the main one that many people totally discount it.
Java and C# were pushed by big companies. Pretty much any other
popular language these days is open source.
I really don't understand the complaints about the lack of an open
source
compiler for D, but then again, I've always been pro-open source and
anti-free
software (I think that the FSF is nuts, personally), so that may be
why.
I really don't understand why you say you don't understand. You list
the reasons why open source is good. Not everybody has the luxury of
plopping down a $1000 for a compiler. People don't want vendor
lock-in. Open source is a popular movement, and you say you're
pro-open source, and you don't understand why D gets knocked for not
being so?
The problem is that D is getting attacked _as if it were closed
source_, which is completely untrue! The source code for ALL D
compilers is freely available at no charge. closed source != !open.
There are many, very strong disadvantages of closed source vs Open
Source, but most don't apply to D.
I see only two disadvantages with the DMD backend vs Open Source:
(1) we carry the risk that something happens to Walter;
(2) DMD cannot be included in Linux distributions.
But since the front-end is GPLed, these apply only to the backend.
It really seems to be a philosophical objection rather than a
practical one. Or else based on a misunderstanding.
Those who complain about dmd not being open-sourced are those who
didn't try programming in D. Those who tried complain about dmd bugs.
We've just tried programming with a friend in pair in D, and after
spending about an hour trying to figure out the program misbehavior we
understood it was a dmd codegen bug (I'll submit a report shortly). He
was very angry and said "After so many years being in development this
is still a b.s. I will never touch this language again". I had nothing
to say other than I'll submit a bug-report and it will hopefully get
fixed.
D2 I imagine :(, with D1 I had my share of ugly bugs, but normally
things work.
Fawzi
Yes, D2, but just because D1 is capable of dynamic closures. Otherwise I'd
say they are about the same bug-wise. At least most of the bugs I came
across usually apply to both.
Usually there is a trivial workaround, but one needs to be experienced
enough to find and apply it, and the perception it leaves to newcomers is
that it is way too early to use dmd, especially in production.
Btw, here is the report: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=5071
