On Saturday, 3 November 2012 at 07:35:26 UTC, Brad Roberts wrote:
On 11/3/2012 12:19 AM, Paulo Pinto wrote:
On Friday, 2 November 2012 at 23:08:00 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
What I have learned in all my years of enterprise development
is that all those features have zero value for business.
Languages get adopted because of business value, not due to
the coolness of their feature set, how boring it may sell.
If we want to sell D to companies using C++ for years, slowly
migrating to JVM, .NET worlds, or just updating their
codebases to C++11, then we need to sell D's business value
not feature lists.
--
Paulo
In my experience (which admittedly is limited to several
companies that are all technology companies, which introduces
an specific bias) it's the engineers which ultimately define
the languages used. Eventually after enough people want to
use <foo>, it gets used. It has little to do with business
value or rational logic and more to do with determination
and momentum.
Of course each of us works in very different eco-systems.
In my case it is enterprise world of Fortune 500 companies, new
technologies only get introduced in two forms:
- customer requires technology X (e.g. Objective-C for iApps, EC2
for deployments, ...)
- company can earn big money if it sells consulting support with
technology X
--
Paulo
