Re: You don't like GC? Do you?
On Monday, 15 October 2018 at 08:21:11 UTC, Eugene Wissner wrote: On Monday, 15 October 2018 at 05:26:56 UTC, Tony wrote: Ideally you wouldn’t have chosen to even try D. You (and others who spend so much time arguing against garbage collection on a forum for a language designed with garbage collection) would be better off using a non-garbage collected language. He doesn't argue against garbage collection. Well, can you state what he does argue against? And D is one of the few languages that can be used without garbage collection, so it can be a non-garbage collected language and can be used as such. Wouldn't C++ or Rust, with their smart pointers, be a better choice for someone who wants to use a compiles-to-object-code language, but can't suffer any garbage collector delays?
Re: You don't like GC? Do you?
On Sunday, 14 October 2018 at 07:51:09 UTC, Stanislav Blinov wrote: That's a lamest excuse if I ever seen one. If you can't be bothered to acquire one of the most relevant skills for writing code for modern systems, then: a) Ideally, you shouldn't be writing code b) At the very least, you're not qualified to give any advice pertaining to writing code PS. "Correctness" also includes correct use of the machine and it's resources. Ideally you wouldn’t have chosen to even try D. You (and others who spend so much time arguing against garbage collection on a forum for a language designed with garbage collection) would be better off using a non-garbage collected language.
Re: Engine of forum
On Monday, 20 August 2018 at 09:52:01 UTC, Peter Alexander wrote: On Monday, 20 August 2018 at 08:39:38 UTC, Andrey wrote: On Sunday, 19 August 2018 at 11:11:56 UTC, rikki cattermole wrote: This is a news group not a forum. The web interface is driven by DFeed and is written in D. It has been designed to be very fast (quite a notable feature). I see this address: https://forum.dlang.org. It is forum. Ok, even if it isn't a forum, will dlang community have someday the real forum? Are there any movements in this direction? What are the specific problems solved or opportunities realised by moving to a real forum? Inability to edit messages.
Re: Remember the Vasa! by Bjarne Stroustrup
With regard to having, say, a GUI written with garbage collection, and then needing to have non-garbage collected code to process audio, could that not be done with GC D calling C? And, if there was a garbage-collected D (D for Applications) and a non-GC D (D for Systems Programming), couldn't one be linked with the other? And before you say "but it should all be together coming out of one compiler" - take a moment to Remember the Vasa! I don't seriously expect two D-ish compilers, but it does seem to make more sense with regard to adding automatic reference counting to a language that already has garbage collection, as well as working to remove garbage collection from the standard library. Presumably at the beginning and for much of D's history, garbage collection was a premier selling point, along with OOP. But with regard to various compile-time stuff and function annotations and other things that didn't exist years ago, has that resulted in noticeably faster programming and/or noticeably higher code quality by those utilizing it?
Re: Remember the Vasa! by Bjarne Stroustrup
On Tuesday, 29 May 2018 at 20:19:09 UTC, bachmeier wrote: I don't think it's difficult to do that yourself. There's no need to have a formal split. One example is that it's really nice to have the GC available for part of the program and avoid it for another part. @nogc gives you a guarantee. Different variants of the language are a special case of this that is equivalent to annotating the entire program to restrict behavior. That's rarely desirable. What would be an example of a type of application (or maybe that should be "which type of domain" or "which type of developer") where you would want part of it to do garbage collection and the rest of it do not do garbage collection?
Re: Remember the Vasa! by Bjarne Stroustrup
On Tuesday, 29 May 2018 at 11:31:53 UTC, Guillaume Piolat wrote: On Tuesday, 29 May 2018 at 05:11:27 UTC, Dmitry Olshansky wrote: D is probably at the edge of what I can tollerate complexity-wise. And we’ll get to simplify a few things soon I believe. Within D, there is a bit smaller and cleaner language struggling to get out! Seems like it could be broken into two languages, one a garbage collected object-oriented language. The other, C with metaprogramming and other "betterC" type stuff.
Re: On Forum Moderation
On Saturday, 26 May 2018 at 12:06:13 UTC, Mike Parker wrote: On Saturday, 26 May 2018 at 11:30:24 UTC, Tony wrote: On Saturday, 26 May 2018 at 11:12:29 UTC, Rubn wrote: What about self moderation? If I make an unprofessional comment and want to delete it? Will this be allowed now? I guess it's more of a feature request. The lack of an edit feature has been brought up before and it was said that it doesn't exist because the forum is combined with an email mailing list. The authoratative database is an NNTP server. The mailing list is an interface to that, and so is the forum (though it maintains its own copy of the DB). Are you saying the forum could have an edit feature?
Re: On Forum Moderation
On Saturday, 26 May 2018 at 11:12:29 UTC, Rubn wrote: What about self moderation? If I make an unprofessional comment and want to delete it? Will this be allowed now? I guess it's more of a feature request. The lack of an edit feature has been brought up before and it was said that it doesn't exist because the forum is combined with an email mailing list.
Re: Sealed classes - would you want them in D?
On Friday, 11 May 2018 at 03:32:25 UTC, Uknown wrote: Also, classes are pretty inconvenient because they are hard to use without the GC. I find it surprising that a language that had Garbage Collection as one of its' key features, now has that feature looked at as an inconvenience. Was it a design error, or did the wrong class of users latch onto the language?
Re: Is it a bug that a parent class that access its own private members from derived classes gets deprecation warning?
On Saturday, 7 April 2018 at 20:14:49 UTC, bauss wrote: The above in my case will give a deprecation warning that "_baz" isn't visible from "Bar". Seems like a bug to me since I'm accessing "_baz" from "Foo" itself and not from "Bar" or is it by design that you can't do such thing. I would say that you are accessing it from Bar. Or maybe that should be "via Bar". You are in Foo, but with a reference to a Bar instance. And trying to get to the _baz that is in that Bar instance. But your design doesn't allow (or at least I would have thought it was an error, not warning) or want Bar objects to be able to access _baz.
Re: does it scale to have 1 person approve of all phobos additions?
I have never used DUB, but as I understand it, it will automatically bring down modules that are stored in gitub or two other git hosts (but not SourceForge for some reason). With that kind of functionality, it seems that inclusion in the standard library becomes much less important for a library. Rather than being included into Phobos, modules could be sanctioned/blessed in some fashion by dlang.org beyond their inclusion at code.dlang.org . Such as having their documentation on dlang.org (or wiki.dlang.org with a link to the wiki page on a dlang.org page that is for listing "sanctioned modules" or "semi-official modules").
Downloads page
The downloads page is a little corrupted: https://dlang.org/download.html
Re: UDK : Comment sont levés les "Mappable keys"
On Monday, 5 March 2018 at 02:12:07 UTC, Adam Levine wrote: Bonjour à tous Alors voilà, quelqu'un saurait-il comment sont levé les évènements des touches appuyées pour UDK? Nous voudrions pouvoir utiliser un nouveau périphérique autre que la souris, le clavier ... : En l’occurrence la Kinect. Nous avons développé notre API qui permet d'exploiter la kinect en c++. Nous l'avons intégré dans UDK en unrealscript, cependant on voudrait pouvoir lever un évènement lorsque l'on détecte un geste. On voudrait donc faire le binding de nos geste avec une commande UDK et réussir à lever nos évènements qui exécuterons les commandes prédéfinis. Par exemple : Bindings=(Name="BrasEnAvant",Command="StartFire | onrelease StopFire") Comment lever l'évènement "BrasEnAvant" ? Merci d'avance Bing translate seemed to a better than normal job on this: Hi all So, would anyone know how the events of the keys pressed for UDK are lifted? We would like to be able to use a new device other than the mouse, the keyboard...: In this case the Kinect. We have developed our API that allows the use of Kinect in C++. We have integrated it into UDK in UnrealScript, however we would like to be able to raise an event when we detect a gesture. So we would like to do the binding of our gestures with a UDK command and succeed in lifting our events that will execute the predefined commands. Like what: Bindings = (Name = "BrasEnAvant ", Command = "StartFire | onrelease StopFire ") How to raise the event "BrasEnAvant "? Thanks in advance
Re: Annotation of functions
On Tuesday, 20 February 2018 at 12:15:57 UTC, psychoticRabbit wrote: I've noticed that Go and Rust annotate functions. func (in go) fn (in rust) I was kind of wondering why they made that choice, given compilers in many languages do not. On Tuesday, 20 February 2018 at 12:15:57 UTC, psychoticRabbit wrote: I've noticed that Go and Rust annotate functions. func (in go) fn (in rust) I was kind of wondering why they made that choice, given compilers in many languages do not. I think it is common to have a keyword used in function definition - outside the C-family. The Pascal family has keywords for function and procedure declaration, as does Fortran. It looks like Cobol uses the "function" keyword for when you call a function and "function-id" for when you define it. Perl, Python and Ruby all have a keyword for function definition. Would this be a useful feature in D? Everything else seems to have an annotation (e.g structs, classes.) So why not functions? What are people's thoughts about it? I think keywords for functions may be to avoid or minimize the difficulty C and C++ have with declaring (and deciphering the declarations of) function pointers. Seems it also would have prevented years of C++ having "the most vexing parse", where a class instantiation can be confused with a function declaration.
Re: -libpath?
On Wednesday, 21 February 2018 at 10:23:08 UTC, Tony wrote: There is a tool that lets you call GDC and use DMD command-line options (gdmd). If it doesn't already exist, what about a tool that allows you to call DMD using GDC options (which I think are the same as gcc/g++/clang/clang++)? I am mainly thinking about being about to do -L/the/path/to/abc and -labc as is done for the Linux C/C++ compilers.
Re: -libpath?
On Wednesday, 21 February 2018 at 02:21:14 UTC, Jonathan Marler wrote: If we added a new "linker-independent" flag to dmd, then you could add paths using the same interface regardless of which linker you are using. I'd expect the argument to be something like: -libpath= The disadvantage is it would be another command line option added to DMD. If there is general agreement that this is a desirable feature, I'll go ahead and implement it. no one responded to this, but I thought I would bump this to the front page to double check if there is any interest in this feature. There is a tool that lets you call GDC and use DMD command-line options (gdmd). If it doesn't already exist, what about a tool that allows you to call DMD using GDC options (which I think are the same as gcc/g++/clang/clang++)?
Re: Which language futures make D overcompicated?
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 19:19:03 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
But none of these features are *necessary* to start coding in
D. They are optional extras that are nice once you're
comfortable with the language. I got by fine for *years*
without even using a single mixin, or knowing what 'inout'
does, or use any attributes.
It's like human language, there's a set of core words ("basic
features") that you have to know to hold a conversation, but
there's a vast vocabulary of more specialized words ("advanced
features") to draw from when you need to be more precise or in
special situations. You don't need to know the *entire*
language to be functional in it. E.g., there's a vast body of
scientific vocabulary that 90% of the general population (of
native English speakers) has no idea about. Yet they can live
and function in society just fine. But that vocabulary is
there when you *do* need it.
That's true for writing your own code, but when you look at other
code like the standard library and are trying to understand it -
if it's written using a plethora of features, then you have to
learn a plethora of features.
Ali G
Re: The name "Phobos" in user-facing docs
I had similar feelings when starting out with D - "why don't they say "standard library" instead of "Phobos"? I don't know that it would change D's image, but I think it would be better for newcomers if they only saw "standard library".
Re: load data from txt file
On Thursday, 4 January 2018 at 05:52:35 UTC, codephantom wrote:
On Wednesday, 3 January 2018 at 05:45:32 UTC, Tony wrote:
Someone else should know what the correct replacement
is for removechars().
the replacement is known as 'programming' ;-)
//string trimmed = removechars!string(line,"[\\[\\]\"\n\r]");
string trimmed;
foreach(c; line)
{
if(c != '[' && c != ']' && c != '\"' && c != '\r' && c !=
'\n' )
trimmed ~= c;
}
OK, thanks. The removechars() note about deprecation said to use
std.regex instead so I have been looking at that and after a
struggle did make some use of std.regex.replaceAll. Reminded me
of the famous Jamie Zawinski quote: "Some people, when confronted
with a problem, think "I know, I'll use regular expressions." Now
they have two problems.
import std.stdio;
import std.string;
import std.algorithm;
import std.regex;
import std.file;
import std.format : format;
void checkLine(string line,long line_number)
{
// not expecting any whitespace or extra colons. Each line:
// ["key":"value"]
long colon_pos = std.string.indexOf(line,':');
assert(colon_pos != -1,format("ERROR: no colon on line
%s",line_number));
long splitter_string_pos = std.string.indexOf(line,"\":\"");
assert(splitter_string_pos != -1,
format("ERROR: line %s missing quote(s) adjacent to
:",line_number));
assert(line[0..2] == "[\"",format("ERROR: no [\" at line %s
start",line_number));
assert(line[line.length - 2 .. line.length] == "\"]",
format("ERROR: no \"] at end of line %s",line_number));
}
void main()
{
string[string] data;
string filename = "users.txt";
assert( std.file.exists(filename), format("ERROR: file %s not
found",filename));
auto f = std.stdio.File("users.txt","r");
scope(exit) { f.close(); }
string line = f.readln!();
long line_number = 0;
while ( line !is null)
{
import std.uni : lineSep;
line_number++;
checkLine(std.string.chomp!(string)(line),line_number);
auto fields = std.algorithm.findSplit(line,"\":\"");
string key =
std.regex.replaceAll(fields[0],regex(`^\["(.*)$`),"$1");
string value =
std.regex.replaceAll(fields[2],regex(`^(.*)"\]\r?\n$`),"$1");
data[key] = value;
line = f.readln!();
}
writeln(data);
writeln("value for key admin:",data["admin"]);
writeln("value for key test:",data["test"]);
}
Re: Maybe D is right about GC after all !
On Wednesday, 3 January 2018 at 21:11:06 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote: On Wednesday, 3 January 2018 at 19:42:28 UTC, Tony wrote: Why would someone choose to use a language with a Garbage Collector and then complain that the language has a Garbage Collector? People always complain about garbage collectors that freeze up the process. Irrespective of the language. It's the antithesis of low level programming… Why would they choose D for low level programming when they knew before they chose it that it had a Garbage Collector? It seems like their programming language decision methodology was flawed. To me, the only people who should be complaining about D's garbage collector are people who don't use D, not people who do. But maybe that is the case, the people who complain about the Garbage Collector in this D forum are not using D.
Re: Maybe D is right about GC after all !
Why would someone choose to use a language with a Garbage Collector and then complain that the language has a Garbage Collector?
Re: load data from txt file
On Tuesday, 2 January 2018 at 22:08:52 UTC, aerto wrote:
Hello and happy new year im new in d so i have a question
i have into a txt file named users.txt the bellow
["admin":"123456789"]
["test":"test345"]
im my app
string[string] data;
so i need to load users.txt content into data in order to be
able to run
writeln(data["admin"]); // i want this to print 123456789
writeln(data["test"]); // i want this to print test345
This seems to work (on Linux with no error checking) but is using
the deprecated removechars() which gets deleted May 2018. There
should be a simple fix using std.regex.replaceAll but I can't
even get a successful compile right now (templates aren't
deducing). Someone else should know what the correct replacement
is for removechars().
import std.stdio;
import std.string;
import std.algorithm;
void main()
{
string line;
string[string] data;
auto f = File("users.txt","r");
while ((line = f.readln('\n')) !is null)
{
string trimmed = removechars!string(line,"[\\[\\]\"\n\r]");
auto fields = findSplit(trimmed,":");
data[fields[0]] = fields[2];
}
writeln(data);
writeln("data for key admin:",data["admin"]);
f.close();
}
Re: Maybe D is right about GC after all !
On Sunday, 24 December 2017 at 22:04:00 UTC, Dan Partelly wrote: 1995. A dark year. Two of the crappiest language ever devised by man arrived. Both gained traction. Java, through marketing. PhP though tribalism. What makes Java a "crappy" language? I think PHP's success is due to its ability to integrate HTML statements. Also, it was often the only option back in the day from cheap web hosting services. And it seemed like on those cheap web hosts, when offered, Python and Perl were accessed via CGI, while PHP used via an Apache module which I think gave it a speed/resource utilization advantage.
Re: Maybe D is right about GC after all !
I have heard with regard to reference counting as is done in Python, that if two objects each have a reference to the other, that they will never be deleted, even if neither is used elsewhere in the program. Garbage collection is not supposed to have that issue, although I don't know how a garbage collector determines that there usage is just via each other and that they can be deleted.
Re: "body" keyword is unnecessary
On Sunday, 19 November 2017 at 11:02:37 UTC, bauss wrote: They wouldn't need to know. Obviously they know its purpose and how it works if they have it in their source code, if they don't have it in their source code and they look at contracts, then they will be fine either way as it's not a required keyword anymore and thus doesn't require documentation, since you can achieve the same semantics without using the keyword. The keyword is completely irrelevant unless you're maintaining old source codes, in which case you should already be aware of how it functions and if you aren't then a little research won't hurt. I may have misunderstood you. I assumed you were saying that the "do" keyword was optional in the syntax. If not, given the fact that "body" may be required on the compiler that someone is currently using and the documentation only mentions "do", the keyword seems relevant to me.
Re: "body" keyword is unnecessary
On Sunday, 19 November 2017 at 11:02:37 UTC, bauss wrote:
On Sunday, 19 November 2017 at 08:13:32 UTC, Tony wrote:
On Sunday, 19 November 2017 at 08:05:38 UTC, Tony wrote:
OK, but how would someone who is looking at:
https://docarchives.dlang.io/v2.074.0/spec/contracts.html
I wish this board had an edit function. That should be
"OK, but how would someone who is looking at:
https://dlang.org/spec/contracts.html
They wouldn't need to know. Obviously they know its purpose and
how it works if they have it in their source code, if they
don't have it in their source code and they look at contracts,
then they will be fine either way
They won't be fine either way if they are using LDC or GDC right
now or they are using a slightly older version of DMD and they
want to try using contracts. They will look at the documentation
and think that they need to write "do" and their version of the
compiler will only accept "body", which won't be documented.
as it's not a required keyword anymore and thus doesn't require
documentation, since you can achieve the same semantics without
using the keyword.
The keyword is completely irrelevant unless you're maintaining
old source codes, in which case you should already be aware of
how it functions and if you aren't then a little research won't
hurt.
"do" doesn't appear to be optional and the compiler still talks
about the deprecated "body", even if any mention of it has been
removed from the documentation:
import std.stdio : writeln;
int MyFunction(int input)
in
{
assert(input >= 0);
}
out (result)
{
assert(result > 100);
}
{
return input + 100;
}
void main()
{
writeln("output: ",MyFunction(10));
}
dmd --version
DMD64 D Compiler v2.077.0
Copyright (c) 1999-2017 by Digital Mars written by Walter Bright
dmd test_contracts.d
test_contracts.d(13): Error: missing `body { ... }` after `in` or
`out`
Re: "body" keyword is unnecessary
On Sunday, 19 November 2017 at 08:05:38 UTC, Tony wrote: OK, but how would someone who is looking at: https://docarchives.dlang.io/v2.074.0/spec/contracts.html I wish this board had an edit function. That should be "OK, but how would someone who is looking at: https://dlang.org/spec/contracts.html
Re: "body" keyword is unnecessary
On Sunday, 19 November 2017 at 07:21:32 UTC, Seb wrote: On Sunday, 19 November 2017 at 04:57:11 UTC, Tony wrote: On Saturday, 18 November 2017 at 19:22:25 UTC, Meta wrote: On Saturday, 18 November 2017 at 16:21:30 UTC, Eljay wrote: [...] Don't worry, you've got a few years yet. Currently `body`is not even deprecated; it's become a conditional keyword, or you can use `do` in its place. It may be deprecated, but someone completely removed it from the documentation on contracts. That could cause some confusion for people using older versions of the compiler. https://dlang.org/spec/contracts.html That's what the docarchives are for: https://docarchives.dlang.io/v2.074.0/spec/contracts.html OK, but how would someone who is looking at: https://docarchives.dlang.io/v2.074.0/spec/contracts.html know what version of the compiler it applies to and where to find older documentation for their version of the compiler?
Re: "body" keyword is unnecessary
On Saturday, 18 November 2017 at 19:22:25 UTC, Meta wrote: On Saturday, 18 November 2017 at 16:21:30 UTC, Eljay wrote: On Monday, 28 March 2011 at 18:59:03 UTC, Walter Bright wrote: On 3/27/2011 10:35 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote: I'll be _very_ excited to have both the destructor issues and the const issues sorted out. They are some of the more annoying quality of implementation issues at the moment. Yes, I agree those are the top priority at the moment, now that we have the 64 bit compiler online and the worst of the optlink issues resolved. NECRO ALERT... But I just saw that https://github.com/dlang/DIPs/blob/master/DIPs/DIP1003.md was addressed with https://github.com/dlang/dmd/pull/6855 . I, for one, will miss 'body' the keyword. Now I'll have to update all my toy code. (Just kidding, I don't mind updating my toy code. At least it isn't a codebase the size of Photoshop!) Don't worry, you've got a few years yet. Currently `body`is not even deprecated; it's become a conditional keyword, or you can use `do` in its place. It may be deprecated, but someone completely removed it from the documentation on contracts. That could cause some confusion for people using older versions of the compiler. https://dlang.org/spec/contracts.html
Re: What do people here use as an IDE?
On Friday, 17 November 2017 at 14:57:52 UTC, Stas wrote: I use and highly recommend Codelobster: http://www.codelobster.com But I would hope you don't recommend it for D language development. "Details of Codelobster: Our goal is to create product which would simplify and speed up to the maximum process of developing full-featured web sites on php."
Re: Zig mentions D in justifying its existence
I am surprised C hasn't tried to become a "better C". Add a string datatype (and maybe other datatypes like datetime). Add an array type (static and/or dynamic) that doesn't suffer from "array decay" when passed to a function or returned from a function. Provide an alternative to the ridiculous syntax for declaring a function pointer. And copy the scope() guard from D. They could also add some data structure code to the standard library. Not a lot of changes and suddenly the language is a lot more usable for all those GNU programs (and any like them) that are written in C.
Re: [OT] mobile rising
On Friday, 10 November 2017 at 14:28:10 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote: On Friday, 10 November 2017 at 12:55:24 UTC, Tony wrote: Very few companies are not "all about making money". That is why Americans were laid off by the millions and replaced by workers in countries with much cheaper labor rates. Bad for the workers, good for "making money". Apple isn't unique in making all it's products outside the USA. I understand what you mean, but I don't think it is a scientific fact that companies are all about making money. They are run by humans with a set of beliefs and desires which they operate under… But those humans at the top, working for public companies, are monitored by a board and stockholders who place "making money" as the main, and normally only, measure of their job performance. Anyway, even companies that are all about making money need to think long term, meaning to take care of their long term reputation. Microsoft was not all about making money in the 90s, but they were all about growing and retaining market share using bad business practices and that cost them their reputation among IT professionals. "growing and retaining market share" is a part of "all about making money", to me. My definition of "not all about making money" is when a company does things to benefit the environment or citizens or employees that they could have legally avoided, which gives them lower profits than they would have had from the other course of action. There are donations for various causes made by some public companies, but I think those are normally an insignificant percentage of their profits. Companies like Amazon are more about growth than making money… Some banks are more about being big than making money long term… Too big to fail and the government will save your ass. Etc. I see Amazon as foregoing profits now for growth - and also wiping out the competition - in order to reap massive profits in the future. At least, I haven't heard of them foregoing profits in order to benefit employees, citizens or the environment. Their stock price has a very high valuation (PE ration of 285.1), reflective of investors expecting massive profits in the future. I don't know. I use a mac daily, but there is not a single product in their line today that is anywhere near good value compared by what you get by building your own Linux/Windows box or buy a quality non-Apple product from Samsung or Asus… That is what I see as the Apple way of doing things from their beginning back in the late 1970s. They make premium and/or unique products and then mark them up more than anybody in the industry. Their products have always been unique with regard to the OS (except for a year or two when they allowed Mac clones) making the situation that no other manufacturer can offer an identical product.
Re: [OT] mobile rising
On Friday, 10 November 2017 at 11:28:41 UTC, Joakim wrote: It would either be you and Jobs, or just you, letting them rebel. I would keep the line. That's funny, as I was responding to your statement above, "So, let them rebel." :D "Let them rebel" was with regard to your point of view. As demonstrated by the sentence I put after it: "You said that they would like to see it go away, and/or they want to milk it." You said that Apple would be happy to see it go away. Then you added that they were "milking" the line while they could. Satisfying rebelling users doesn't jive with either position. They rebel and you want to get rid of it - and you get rid of it. They rebel wanting changes, and you only want to keep milk it while you can - then you get rid of it, because you can't milk what you have. Your logic is extremely confused. Let me spell it out for you: the Mac is all but dead, particularly when compared to the mobile computing tidal wave, since they sell 10 iPhones + iPads for every Mac, according to the sales link I gave you before. They have cut investment in that legacy Mac product, but they would like to keep selling a lower-quality product at high prices to the few chumps that still maintain the old Mac aura in their heads. You have little company in thinking the Mac line is a "low-quality product". The computer magazine writers gush about the Macbooks. As far as "all but dead", in the most recent quarter, that line did have declining sales from the previous year, but it was "5.6 billion in revenue in Q3 — over 12% of Apple’s total for the quarter". So that is what they do, milk the suckers still paying high prices for a rarely refreshed product with a lot more bugs. I don't know what's hard to understand about this for you. When the Mac userbase rebels, they try to calm them down and say they're coming out with a new Mac Pro _next year_, five years since the last one! Your logic seems extremely confused. If they aren't changing the product it won't have a "lot more bugs". With no changes you get less bugs over time. Apple is a business. As long as the Mac faithful are still willing to pay a lot of money for lower-quality products, they will gladly take their money, even though it's now just a sideline for their real business, the iPhone. Of course, they'd rather just focus on the iPhone, but if they can take a lot of devs off macOS and still milk those suckers, why wouldn't they? What does "take a lot of devs off macOS" refer to? Apple is all about making money, which is why they're the largest company in the world, with some forecasting that they will soon be the first company to have a market cap of... one trillion dollars!!! insertDoctorEvilPinkie(); Very few companies are not "all about making money". That is why Americans were laid off by the millions and replaced by workers in countries with much cheaper labor rates. Bad for the workers, good for "making money". Apple isn't unique in making all it's products outside the USA. I don't see where it makes sense to call people who buy Mac products suckers (they seem especially popular with software developers) who pay extra for what you call "low-quality equipment" without saying the same thing about the people who buy iPhones. Your mantra is "people need so much less than they are buying". Well, that applies as much to iPhone users as it does Mac users. People don't need $1,000 phones and they don't need to upgrade a phone every two years. The large Apple profit comes from offering quality products and then pricing them at the highest gross profit margin in the industry. In order to get people to pay a premium for their products it helps to have a mystique or following, and the macOS line helps to maintain their mystique and it is small potatoes next to their phone business. I've already said repeatedly that they're not going to drop the Mac line anytime soon, so I don't know why you want to write a paragraph justifying keeping it. My post was in response to this statement of yours "Simple, they see the writing on the wall, ie much smaller sales than mobile, SO THEY WANT THE LEGACY PRODUCT TO GO AWAY, which means they can focus on the much bigger mobile market." That seems to be a contradiction to "they're not going to drop the Mac line anytime soon". No contradiction: they want the Mac to go away, but are happy to keep supplementing their bottom line while pulling engineers off of it, just like the iPod Touch. If somebody wants something to go away and they can make it go away, they make it go away. It is most certainly a contradiction to say "they want it to go away" and they "want it to not go away so they can milk it". You seem to be confused by the fact that a business sometimes has contradictory goals- should we focus exclusively on the iPhone and make more money there or keep the Mac limping along too?- and tries to balan
Re: [OT] mobile rising
On Friday, 10 November 2017 at 11:10:30 UTC, Tony wrote: I don't see any relationship between that iOS picture in the Wiki article and Metro. The idea is RESIZABLE, LIVE tiles. Not effects to make them look 3D or not. "live tile" meaning the underlying app can dynamically put readable information in the tile. Such as the most recent sender of email and subject, the most recent headline, the item at the top of your todo list, a calendar reminder, current weather information.
Re: [OT] mobile rising
On Wednesday, 8 November 2017 at 09:34:39 UTC, Joakim wrote: I see, so your claim is that MS, Nokia, HP, Sony, all much larger companies than Apple or Google at the time, could not have countered them even on a lucky day. I wonder why this is, as they certainly had more money, you don't believe they're that bright? :) Google bought Android from a startup of sharp programmers. There are only so many mobile operating systems and operating systems are not easy to develop. Jobs got back into Apple because they had failed in an attempt to replace OS 9 and Jobs had a talented software team and an OS from his failing Next company. Nokia had a big internal effort to replace Symbian (which had multi-tasking from the beginning, unlike iOS) due to some flaw that it could only handle 640 x 360 screens (bigger than the first couple iPhone generations). But one effort failed and another, based on Linux came too late to survive being cut at the same time the new CEO from Microsoft announced that Symbian would be discontinued and replaced by Windows Mobile. On Wednesday, 8 November 2017 at 07:04:24 UTC, Tony wrote: On Monday, 6 November 2017 at 08:33:16 UTC, Joakim wrote: The vast majority of users would be covered by 5-10 GBs of available storage, which is why the lowest tier of even the luxury iPhone was 16 GBs until last year. Every time I talk to normal people, ie non-techies unlike us, and ask them how much storage they have in their device, whether smartphone, tablet, or laptop, they have no idea. If I look in the device, I inevitably find they're only using something like 3-5 GBs max, out of the 20-100+ GBs they have available. You are making an assumption that people want as much storage for a combo phone/PC as they do for only a phone. You need to also check how much storage they are using on their PCs. You need to read what I actually wrote, I was talking about laptops too. I don't go to people's homes and check their desktops, but their laptops fall under the same low-storage umbrella, and laptops are 80% of PCs sold these days. OK, I see you did mention laptops. It isn't my case and I find it hard to believe that people are being sold ever larger disk drives when they can survive with a 32GB flash rom. I never made any previous claim about what IDEs are being used. The only time I previously mentioned an IDE was with regard to RemObjects and Embarcadero offering cross-compilation to Android/iOS with their products. "There is a case to be made for supporting Android/iOS cross-compilation. But it doesn't have to come at the expense of Windows 64-bit integration. Not sure they even involve the same skillsets. Embarcadero and Remobjects both now support Android/iOS development from their Windows (and macOS in the case of Remobjects) IDEs." That was to highlight that those two compiler companies have seen fit to also cross-compile to mobile - they saw an importance to mobile development. It wasn't about what IDEs are best for mobile or even what IDEs are being used for mobile. If you look back to the first mention of IDES, it was your statement, "Good luck selling game developers on using D to develop for Android, when you can't supply those same game developers a top-notch development environment for the premier platform for performance critical games - Windows 64-bit." That at least implies that they're using the same IDE to target both mobile and PC gaming, which is what I was disputing. If you agree that they use completely different toolchains, then it is irrelevant whether D supports Windows-focused IDEs, as it doesn't affect mobile-focused devs. My statements quoted didn't mention IDEs and they didn't imply IDEs. What was implied was the initial line in the first post "* better dll support for Windows". My assumption is that game developers (or just developers) work on multiple OSes. If you want them to use a language - like D - they should find it compelling to use on all their platforms. Your statement was made in direct response to my question, "why spend time getting D great Windows IDE support if you don't think Windows has much of a future?" What does IDE support refer to? You didn't say "get good Windows IDEs". In any event, I was talking about DLLs and related Windows issues that you would encounter using Vim and D. I've already said I don't think there's much overlap between mobile and PC games, the markets are fairly disjoint. The top mobile games are never released for PC and vice versa. I never said the games have overlap. I said the developers have overlap. As for dll support, that was not mentioned at all in the OT thread to which you were responding, and you never called it out. Never called what out? You were saying that Windows was going down by 99% in some unstated timeframe and I challenged that notion. The first and second posts in this thread mention DLL support and I
Re: [OT] mobile rising
On Wednesday, 8 November 2017 at 09:34:39 UTC, Joakim wrote: Why did they fund development of a new iMac Pro which is coming this December as well as the new MacBook Pros that came out this June? That's a contradiction of "milk it like an iPod". Because their userbase was rebelling? I take it you're not that familiar with Mac users, but they were genuinely scared that Apple was leaving them behind, since they weren't refreshing Mac and Macbooks much anymore and all Apple's focus is on iOS: So, let them rebel. You said that they would like to see it go away, and/or they want to milk it. If you have to spend money on development to keep selling it, then you can't "milk it". You and I and Jobs may've let them rebel, but Apple is a public corporation. They can't just let easy money go, their shareholders may not like it. Perhaps you're not too familiar with legacy calculations, but they're probably still making good money off Macs, but it just distracts and keeps good Apple devs off the real cash cow, iPhone. Even if the Mac financials aren't _that_ great anymore, you don't necessarily want to piss off your oldest and most loyal customers, who may stop buying iPhones and iPads too. It would either be you and Jobs, or just you, letting them rebel. I would keep the line. That's funny, as I was responding to your statement above, "So, let them rebel." :D "Let them rebel" was with regard to your point of view. As demonstrated by the sentence I put after it: "You said that they would like to see it go away, and/or they want to milk it." You said that Apple would be happy to see it go away. Then you added that they were "milking" the line while they could. Satisfying rebelling users doesn't jive with either position. They rebel and you want to get rid of it - and you get rid of it. They rebel wanting changes, and you only want to keep milk it while you can - then you get rid of it, because you can't milk what you have. The large Apple profit comes from offering quality products and then pricing them at the highest gross profit margin in the industry. In order to get people to pay a premium for their products it helps to have a mystique or following, and the macOS line helps to maintain their mystique and it is small potatoes next to their phone business. I've already said repeatedly that they're not going to drop the Mac line anytime soon, so I don't know why you want to write a paragraph justifying keeping it. My post was in response to this statement of yours "Simple, they see the writing on the wall, ie much smaller sales than mobile, SO THEY WANT THE LEGACY PRODUCT TO GO AWAY, which means they can focus on the much bigger mobile market." That seems to be a contradiction to "they're not going to drop the Mac line anytime soon". As for mystique, it is laughable that you think this outdated Mac line that practically nobody buys compared to the iPhone provides any. :) More likely, they will keep milking the Mac-buying chumps till they stop, or when they can just tell them to buy an iPhone with a multi-window option instead. "Nobody buys" Rolls Royces, but they have a lot of mystique. Mystique isn't measured by sales volume. If people ever get so cost-conscious that they decide to buy a $150 companion for their phone, instead of a $400 laptop, it's unlikely they will be using iPhones. You can get a nice Android phone with plenty of RAM/ROM for half the price of an iPhone.
Re: [OT] mobile rising
Apple had a big benefit on mobile with their iTunes store that had already been established on Desktop and the very popular iPod. They also had rich USA buyers who bought more apps than users of the other platforms which encouraged developers to target iOS. And they had the Apple/Jobs mystique.
Re: [OT] Windows dying
On Monday, 6 November 2017 at 08:33:16 UTC, Joakim wrote: The vast majority of users would be covered by 5-10 GBs of available storage, which is why the lowest tier of even the luxury iPhone was 16 GBs until last year. Every time I talk to normal people, ie non-techies unlike us, and ask them how much storage they have in their device, whether smartphone, tablet, or laptop, they have no idea. If I look in the device, I inevitably find they're only using something like 3-5 GBs max, out of the 20-100+ GBs they have available. You are making an assumption that people want as much storage for a combo phone/PC as they do for only a phone. You need to also check how much storage they are using on their PCs. I never made any previous claim about what IDEs are being used. The only time I previously mentioned an IDE was with regard to RemObjects and Embarcadero offering cross-compilation to Android/iOS with their products. "There is a case to be made for supporting Android/iOS cross-compilation. But it doesn't have to come at the expense of Windows 64-bit integration. Not sure they even involve the same skillsets. Embarcadero and Remobjects both now support Android/iOS development from their Windows (and macOS in the case of Remobjects) IDEs." That was to highlight that those two compiler companies have seen fit to also cross-compile to mobile - they saw an importance to mobile development. It wasn't about what IDEs are best for mobile or even what IDEs are being used for mobile. If you look back to the first mention of IDES, it was your statement, "Good luck selling game developers on using D to develop for Android, when you can't supply those same game developers a top-notch development environment for the premier platform for performance critical games - Windows 64-bit." That at least implies that they're using the same IDE to target both mobile and PC gaming, which is what I was disputing. If you agree that they use completely different toolchains, then it is irrelevant whether D supports Windows-focused IDEs, as it doesn't affect mobile-focused devs. My statements quoted didn't mention IDEs and they didn't imply IDEs. What was implied was the initial line in the first post "* better dll support for Windows". My assumption is that game developers (or just developers) work on multiple OSes. If you want them to use a language - like D - they should find it compelling to use on all their platforms. I've always thought that flat Metro interface was best suited for mobile displays, the easiest to view, render, and touch. To some extent, all the other mobile interfaces have copied it, with their move to flat UIs over the years. However, it obviously takes much more than a nice GUI to do well in mobile. I don't know what a flat UI is, but every mobile OS I have used - Blackberry 9/10, Nokia Symbian, Nokia Linux, Palm OS, WebOS, Firefox OS, iOS, Android - all have the same essential interface. Icons on a scrolling desktop. Windows 8/10 Mobile, with the resizable live tiles is the only one that does the interface differently, and in my opinion, does it the best. Why did they fund development of a new iMac Pro which is coming this December as well as the new MacBook Pros that came out this June? That's a contradiction of "milk it like an iPod". Because their userbase was rebelling? I take it you're not that familiar with Mac users, but they were genuinely scared that Apple was leaving them behind, since they weren't refreshing Mac and Macbooks much anymore and all Apple's focus is on iOS: So, let them rebel. You said that they would like to see it go away, and/or they want to milk it. If you have to spend money on development to keep selling it, then you can't "milk it". You and I and Jobs may've let them rebel, but Apple is a public corporation. They can't just let easy money go, their shareholders may not like it. Perhaps you're not too familiar with legacy calculations, but they're probably still making good money off Macs, but it just distracts and keeps good Apple devs off the real cash cow, iPhone. Even if the Mac financials aren't _that_ great anymore, you don't necessarily want to piss off your oldest and most loyal customers, who may stop buying iPhones and iPads too. It would either be you and Jobs, or just you, letting them rebel. I would keep the line. The large Apple profit comes from offering quality products and then pricing them at the highest gross profit margin in the industry. In order to get people to pay a premium for their products it helps to have a mystique or following, and the macOS line helps to maintain their mystique and it is small potatoes next to their phone business.
Re: [OT] Windows dying
On Friday, 3 November 2017 at 14:12:56 UTC, Joakim wrote: I don't know why you're so obsessed with storage when even midrange smartphones come with 32 GBs nowadays, expandable to much more with an SD card. My tablet has only 16 GBs of storage, with only 10-12 actually accessible, but I've never had a problem building codebases that take up GBs of space with all the object files, alongside a 64 GB microSD card for many, mostly HD TV shows and movies. The smallest storage Windows 10/Linux laptops have is a 128GB SSD. Even with a faster 128GB SSD being around the price of a 1TB hard drive, I still see 1TB being the dominant low-end storage. So I am going by what I see being offered as a minimum. It may be that most or even 99% of people can get by with 32GB flash memory, but it isn't being offered (except on Chromebooks which have traditionally only been web browsers, and on Windows 10S machines which can only run Windows Store apps). Are you suggesting they are developing their games for iOS and Android devices ON those devices? Apple has XCode for developing iOS apps and it runs on macOS machines only. There is also the Xamarin IDE or IDE plug-in from Microsoft that allows C# on iOS, but it runs on macOS or WIndows. For Android, there is Android Studio - "The Official IDE of Android" - which runs on Windows, macOS and Linux. There is no Android version. Yes, of course they're still largely developing mobile games on PCs, though I'm not sure why you think that matters. But your original claim was that they're still using PC-focused IDEs, as opposed to new mobile-focused IDEs like XCode or Android Studio, which you now highlight. I never made any previous claim about what IDEs are being used. The only time I previously mentioned an IDE was with regard to RemObjects and Embarcadero offering cross-compilation to Android/iOS with their products. "There is a case to be made for supporting Android/iOS cross-compilation. But it doesn't have to come at the expense of Windows 64-bit integration. Not sure they even involve the same skillsets. Embarcadero and Remobjects both now support Android/iOS development from their Windows (and macOS in the case of Remobjects) IDEs." That was to highlight that those two compiler companies have seen fit to also cross-compile to mobile - they saw an importance to mobile development. It wasn't about what IDEs are best for mobile or even what IDEs are being used for mobile. Not that it matters, but I don't think that XCode meets the definition of "new mobile-focused IDE" as-as far as I know, it was developed for OS X development and is still used for such. Android Studio may be "new mobile-focused", even though based on IntelliJ IDEA. Yes, Windows is dominant, dominant in a niche, internal IT. The consumer mobile market is much larger nowadays, and Windows has almost no market share there. Sad too, because of all the tablet/phone interfaces, the only one that is not just "icons on a background", and my personal preference, is Windows Mobile. As for Microsoft, Windows is not their only product, they have moved Office onto the dominant mobile platforms. As long as they keep supporting mobile, they could eke out an existence. Their big bet on Azure is going to end badly though. They have Word, Excel, Powerpoint for mobile, but they are free. The Android store mentions "in-app purchases" but I wasn't offered any. Maybe it is for OneDrive storage of files. I already have that so it could be why I don't see anything to purchase in the app. Why did they fund development of a new iMac Pro which is coming this December as well as the new MacBook Pros that came out this June? That's a contradiction of "milk it like an iPod". Because their userbase was rebelling? I take it you're not that familiar with Mac users, but they were genuinely scared that Apple was leaving them behind, since they weren't refreshing Mac and Macbooks much anymore and all Apple's focus is on iOS: So, let them rebel. You said that they would like to see it go away, and/or they want to milk it. If you have to spend money on development to keep selling it, then you can't "milk it". It is ironic that Microsoft and Ubuntu both saw a convergence of mobile and desktop and began modifying their desktop interace to best suit mobile, and now Ubuntu has abandoned the idea and Microsoft has abandoned the phone market. As it turns out, any convergence will have to come from the two dominant mobile OSes as it is impossible to go the other direction due to the app catch-22.
Re: [OT] Windows dying
On Friday, 3 November 2017 at 09:16:42 UTC, Joakim wrote: Why do predictions about the future matter when at the present Windows dominates the desktop and is also strong in the server space? Because that desktop market matters much less than it did before, see the current mobile dominance, yet the D core team still focuses only on that dying x86 market. As for the future, why spend time getting D great Windows IDE support if you don't think Windows has much of a future? The concept that you are proposing, that people will get rid of ALL their desktops and laptops for phones or tablets, doesn't seem to be happening right now. To begin with, I never said they'd "ALL" be replaced in the paragraph you're quoting above, but yes, that's essentially what will eventually happen. You said 99% would go away. So "almost all". And of course it's happening right now, why do you think PC sales are down 25% over the last six years, after rising for decades? For many people, a PC was overkill but they didn't have a choice of another easier form factor and OS. Now they do. There are others reasons for PC sales declining beyond someone just using a phone or a tablet. Some find their current PC fast enough and see no reason to upgrade as frequently as they did in the past - only a hard drive failure will trigger a PC upgrade for them. Some have cut down from a desktop and a laptop to just a laptop as the laptops got faster. Or a family replaces some combination of laptops and desktops with a combination of laptops/desktops/tablets/phones. That 25% is not indicative of 25% of homes getting rid of ALL of their PC/laptops. At this point, were they do to that, they would end up with a machine that has less power in most cases (there are Atom and Celeron laptops), and probably less memory and disk storage. That solution would be most attractive to Chromebook type users and very low end laptop users. And while people buy low spec laptops and desktops, there are still many laptops and desktops sold with chips that aren't named Atom and Celeron or arm. If phones and tablets try to get chips as powerful as those for the desktop and laptops they run into the chip maker's problem - the more processing power, the more the electricity the chip uses. Phones and tablets don't plug into the wall and they are smaller than the batteries in laptops. And in order to use a phone/tablet as a "lean forward" device (as opposed to "lean back") and do work, they will have to spend money on a "laptop shell" that will have a screen and keyboard and probably an SSD/HD which will cancel most of the cost savings from not buying a laptop. You seem wholly ignorant of this market and the various points I've made in this thread. Do you know what the median Windows PC sold costs? Around $400. Now shop around, are you finding great high-spec devices at that price? You said 99% are going away. You need to talk about a lot more than median prices. But nevertheless, $400 laptops have better specs and performance than $400 tablets and phones. And you are good to go with a laptop. People who want to go down to the coffee shop and work on their term paper on a laptop just take the laptop. People who want to go down to the coffee shop and work on their term paper on a phone or tablet, have to bring a keyboard and monitor (phone) or a keyboard and tablet stand and squint at their screen (tablet). The high-spec market that you focus on is a tiny niche, the bulk of the PC market is easily eclipsed by mobile performance, which is why people are already turning in their PCs for mobile. I don't think that phones/tablets can compete performance-wise with $400 and up machines, which you claim is over 50% of the market. Battery life on mobile is already much better than laptops, for a variety of reasons including the greater efficiency of mobile ARM chips. That is a common belief, but it is referred to as a myth in many places, including this research paper after performing tests on different architectures. It ends with: "An x86 chip can be more power efficient than an ARM processor, or vice versa, but it’ll be the result of other factors — not whether it’s x86 or ARM." https://www.extremetech.com/extreme/188396-the-final-isa-showdown-is-arm-x86-or-mips-intrinsically-more-power-efficient/3 And the Sentio laptop shell I already linked in this thread has a screen, keyboard, and battery but no SSD/HD, which is why it only costs $150, much less than a laptop. I see that 11.6" screen setup with the small storage of a phone as competition for $150 Chromebooks, not $400 Windows laptops. I would prefer to be on my Chromebook and take a call on my cell phone, rather than having my cellphone plugged into a docking station and have to unplug it or put it on speaker phone. In the case of trying to court Android development, I read that 95% of Android is done on Java (
Re: [OT] Windows dying
On Wednesday, 1 November 2017 at 08:49:05 UTC, Joakim wrote: On Wednesday, 1 November 2017 at 00:16:19 UTC, Mengu wrote: On Monday, 30 October 2017 at 13:32:23 UTC, Joakim wrote: I don't know how intense your data analysis is, but I replaced a Win7 ultrabook that had a dual-core i5 and 4 GBs of RAM with an Android tablet that has a quad-core ARMv7 and 3 GBs of RAM as my daily driver a couple years ago, without skipping a beat. I built large mixed C++/D codebases on my ultrabook, now I do that on my Android/ARM tablet, which has a slightly weaker chip than my smartphone. How does the performance compare between an i5 laptop and an Android tablet? Why do predictions about the future matter when at the present Windows dominates the desktop and is also strong in the server space? Because that desktop market matters much less than it did before, see the current mobile dominance, yet the D core team still focuses only on that dying x86 market. As for the future, why spend time getting D great Windows IDE support if you don't think Windows has much of a future? The concept that you are proposing, that people will get rid of ALL their desktops and laptops for phones or tablets, doesn't seem to be happening right now. At this point, were they do to that, they would end up with a machine that has less power in most cases (there are Atom and Celeron laptops), and probably less memory and disk storage. That solution would be most attractive to Chromebook type users and very low end laptop users. And while people buy low spec laptops and desktops, there are still many laptops and desktops sold with chips that aren't named Atom and Celeron or arm. If phones and tablets try to get chips as powerful as those for the desktop and laptops they run into the chip maker's problem - the more processing power, the more the electricity the chip uses. Phones and tablets don't plug into the wall and they are smaller than the batteries in laptops. And in order to use a phone/tablet as a "lean forward" device (as opposed to "lean back") and do work, they will have to spend money on a "laptop shell" that will have a screen and keyboard and probably an SSD/HD which will cancel most of the cost savings from not buying a laptop. In the case of trying to court Android development, I read that 95% of Android is done on Java (and maybe other JVM languages like the now "officially supported" Kotlin) and 5% in C or C++. But that 5% is for applications that have a need for high performance, which is mostly games. Good luck selling game developers on using D to develop for Android, when you can't supply those same game developers a top-notch development environment for the premier platform for performance critical games - Windows 64-bit. I have seen conflicting reports about what OS is bigger in the server market, but Windows is substantial and the more frequent winner. https://community.spiceworks.com/networking/articles/2462-server-virtualization-and-os-trends https://www.1and1.com/digitalguide/server/know-how/linux-vs-windows-the-big-server-check/ I have never seen any report that Windows is "bigger in the server market." I linked one that said: "And what OSes are running in virtual machines and on physical servers around the world? It turns out like with client OSes, Microsoft is dominant. Fully 87.7% of the physical servers and VMs in the Spiceworks network (which are mostly on-premises) run Microsoft Windows Server." Last month's Netcraft survey notes, "which underlying operating systems are used by the world's web facing computers? By far the most commonly used operating system is Linux, which runs on more than two-thirds of all web-facing computers. This month alone, the number of Linux computers increased by more than 91,000; and again, this strong growth can largely be attributed to cloud hosting providers, where Linux-based instances are typically the cheapest and most commonly available." https://news.netcraft.com/archives/2017/09/11/september-2017-web-server-survey.html Web-facing server is a subset of servers. Shared web hosting services are probably a harder target for native-code applications than internal IT servers. But regardless of whether Windows is dominant, or just widely used, you haven't made predictions that Windows servers are going to die. Your first link is actually a bad sign for Windows, as it's likely just because companies are trying to save money by having their employees run Windows apps off a virtualized Windows Server, rather than buying a ton more Windows PCs. I would say that is an unlikely scenario. Companies use virtual machines for servers because it allows for the email server and/or http server and/or database server and/or application server to be on one physical machine, and allow for the system administrator to reboot the OS or take the server offline when making an upgrade/bug fix, and
Re: [OT] Windows dying
On Monday, 30 October 2017 at 13:32:23 UTC, Joakim wrote: There will always be a few Windows cockroaches that survive the mobile nuclear blast, but we're talking about the majority who won't. Why do predictions about the future matter when at the present Windows dominates the desktop and is also strong in the server space? I have seen conflicting reports about what OS is bigger in the server market, but Windows is substantial and the more frequent winner. https://community.spiceworks.com/networking/articles/2462-server-virtualization-and-os-trends https://www.1and1.com/digitalguide/server/know-how/linux-vs-windows-the-big-server-check/ And if desktop OSes were going to go away, the MacOS would go before Windows.
Re: What is the Philosophy of D?
Combine C and Java.
Re: D on quora ...
On Friday, 6 October 2017 at 21:12:58 UTC, Rion wrote: Other aspects like being unsure when the GC will trigger can also influence people to a non-gc language. The Go developers have done a massive ( an impressive ) amount of work on trying to reduce GC pauses in the last two years, and that communication and effort has helped to reduce the GC myth ( for people looking at Go ). How can GC issues be a myth if the Go developers did an impressive massive amount of work trying to reduced GC pauses?
