Erlang being uncommon doesn't mean it doesn't have awesome
features.
Java (or COBOL :p) are common, that doesn't mean we should copy
them
just to make it easier for Java users to move to D.
OT, but this always pisses me off:
I use Vim. On Linux. Vim not being an IDE doesn't mean it doesn't
have autocompletion, or pretty much any common IDE feature (or...
many that no IDE in existence has, for that matter). You just have
to build your own environment with plugins. I understand most
people
might not want to spend time to do that, but there are quite
a few that do - and I wouldn't use anything else now, hobby or
job.
(BTW, I originally used NetBeans, Eclipse, Code::Blocks on
Windows - I know VS is significantly better, but nothing can tear
me off
the pure productivity of my buttonless screen displaying 10 files
at once)
Oh, and don't use Vi for development (I don't know anyone who
does,
anyway - for basic text editing when there's nothing else, yes,
but for development?).
That said, there's no intelligent autocompletion for D in Vim
(there is for C/C++, Java, Python...).
I for one would like to have it. But this is not responsibility of
DMD devs - DMD will never turn into Clang.
I hope if anyone works on a project like this, they do it as a
library
so not only VisualD or DDT or whatever will benefit.
On Saturday, 21 January 2012 at 18:35:40 UTC, Manu wrote:
On 21 January 2012 18:09, Sean Kelly <s...@invisibleduck.org>
wrote:
I suggest checking out Erlang messaging, as it's the basis for
this
design. Maybe then things will be a bit clearer.
Are you suggesting that erlang is a common language that all
programmers
worth their paycheques are familiar with... and would also find
intuitive?
I don't know if it's the most sensible API decision to model a
design off
something so obscure, unless you suspect that D should appeal
primary to
ex-erlang users?
Just to re-iterate, I'm not arguing against the API or it's
merits, it's
really cool, just that it shouldn't be the trivial one named
receive().
That name should be reserved for the most conventional API.
Seriously? I usually turn that feature off if I use an IDE
that has it.
Large projects aren't an issue. I've worked on some counted in
millions of
lines of code.
Why even argue this? What's the point in intentionally making D
unappealing
to anyone who works in a non-linux professional environment? Do
you aim to
alienate those users from the community; keep the community
nice and
small...
I honestly don't understand how so many people around here can
blindly
consider windows users, and 'IDE users' in general, a niche or
minority
user base, and also, what the value of presenting this argument
might
actually be?
Who are the majority of professional devs here? What industry
do they work
in? Do they, or do they intend to use D in their professional
work? What
language are they coming from/using normally in their work? Do
they
*really*use vi in the office?
Is there a poll, or some statistics of this sort? I'd be very
curious...
because this argument comes up every other day.