On 12/17/11 10:45 PM, Caligo wrote:
D is already a success, a BIG success. Walter and Andrei (and the amazing community, of course) have created a programming language that is light years ahead of C++, Java and Go.
Well if by success you mean "we didn't find totally embarrassing flaws in its design yet", then yes, D is a success. If, however, you meant "it is used by a large number of major projects", then I'd disagree. We want to get there, but we're not already there.
I don't think you know this, but every high school student who takes a computer science course is required to learn Java. It doesn't stop there: in college and university it's all Java, too, and this has been going on for almost two decades. And before Java it was mostly C++, but it was phased out. Unless the course specifically requires a different programming language (which is rare), you have to beg to use a different programming language (which I did). Sometimes professors do allow other programming languages, but they mostly limit it to C/C++. In most cases students either have to accept it and do what they are told to do, or fail the course. If that's not indoctrination, I don't know what is. Also, the reason they restrict education to things like Java and C++ has very little to do with the fact that those languages have claimed big market share; rather, it's because corporations have had a vested interest in universities in the first place and they receive what they order. Just look at what Microsoft has been doing in universities: everything from "free" gifts such as free copies of Windows OS and Visual Studio Ultimate that cost thousands of dollars to sponsoring various kinds of events. The students who are influenced by such tactics, to whom do you think they are going to be loyal to? The _main point_ here is that if students had been give the choice to learn a programming language of their choosing, many of the so called "successful" programming languages would not have been so "successful" today. So next time you decide to lecture someone on how popular or "successful" Java is, just remember how it got to be so "successful".
I think you're moseying around a solid point without quite nailing it; you're still doing a lot better than most.
It's quite amazing how many discussions a la "Java is successful because..." completely neglect an essential point: one BILLION dollars was poured into Java, a significant fraction of which was put in branding, marketing, and PR.
The sheer fact that many of us - even those who actually _lived_ through the Java marketing bonanza - tend to forget about it echoes many studies in marketing: people believe they are making rational and logical choices and refuse to admit and understand they are influenced by marketing, even when they fall prey to textbook marketing techniques.
It's easy to forget now, but in the craze of late 1990s, Java was so heavily and so successfully advertised, I remember there were managers who were desperate to adopt Java, and were convinced it would be a strategic disaster if they failed to do so. That weirdly applied even to managers who knew nothing about programming - they were as confused as people who lined up to buy a Windows 95 CD that they couldn't install because they didn't have a computer. It was incredible - a manager would tell me how vital Java adoption is, but had no idea what Java really was. There were Java commercials on the TV! (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pHxtB8zr8UM)
Back then people were made to believe pretty much anything and everything good about Java. Some believed Java was small and great for limited-memory embedded systems. Some believed there's no real Internet without Java. Some believed Java was awesomely fast. Most importantly, a lot of people in decision positions believed jumping on the Java bandwagon was an absolute necessity. And this gushing of social proof became a self-fulfilling prophecy because with many people working on Java an entire web of tools, libraries, and applications sprung to life, creating offer and demand for more of the same.
Andy Warhol would have loved the stunt. Except jumpstarting this gigantic engine wasn't free - it cost Sun one billion dollars. (It could be speculated that ultimately this was part of the reason of Sun's demise because other companies, not Sun, were able to capitalize on Java.) Forgetting the role that that billion dollar played in the success of Java would miss on probably the single most important reason, and by far.
Right now I'm begging and cajoling Facebook and Microsoft for 5K-10K to organize a conference on D in 2012. I'll say D is successful when many companies would be honored to offer that level of sponsorship.
Andrei
