Sun, 31 Oct 2010 14:01:02 -0700, Walter Bright wrote: > Nick Sabalausky wrote: >> Yea, what many people don't realize is that developing within a big >> business environment is *very* constraining, for various reasons. It >> really is much easier for a small informal group to write good software >> than it is for a bigger business environment. But somehow people are >> brainwashed into thinking that having know-nothing managers sticking >> their fingers where they don't belong is somehow supposed to produce >> better results. Larger resources and brainwashing (ie, "brand >> recognition") are the *only* advantages the business environment >> provides, all the other advantages go to the small informal devs. > > > Another interesting factoid is that I've been told "you can't possibly > do that" from the experts before I wrote the first line of the C > compiler right up to today. Retard's comments are typical.
Take a look at GCC now. Take a look at LLVM. Compare with DMC. They both generate better code than DMC. I simply have no reason to use DMC (or DMD when LDC and GDC implement the spec well enough). I agree the human resources follow the law of diminishing returns. However those resources help in so many ways. You can hire marketing people, web designers, document writers. D has improved so much after the community was allowed to take part in the development. DMD would suck badly if Don didn't help you. I don't know how my comments are typical. I base my claims on established facts and real world experiences with D. The optimal number of developers surely isn't one.