On Thu, 07 Apr 2011 18:46:06 -0400, Matthias Pleh j...@konrad.net wrote:
Am 01.04.2011 02:50, schrieb bearophile:
inventing new language features for D3
Why do you always mention D3.
I always hated the M$ strategy to release every 2 years a new C#/.Net
version.
I'm satisfied with D2, and
On Thu, 07 Apr 2011 23:45:54 +0300, Bruno Medeiros
brunodomedeiros+spam@com.gmail wrote:
On 01/04/2011 01:50, bearophile wrote:
On the other hand it's all voluntary service, most people don't get
paid to help D development, so they_can't_ be managed as employed
people, especially in a
On 01/04/2011 01:50, bearophile wrote:
On the other hand it's all voluntary service, most people don't get paid to
help D development, so they_can't_ be managed as employed people, especially
in a public forum designed for generic discussions about a language.
Some people are more interested
Am 01.04.2011 02:50, schrieb bearophile:
inventing new language features for D3
Why do you always mention D3.
I always hated the M$ strategy to release every 2 years a new C#/.Net
version.
I'm satisfied with D2, and let's improve it in quality not in quantity
of features.
just my 2 cents
On Thu, 31 Mar 2011 05:09:44 +0300, jasonw u...@webmails.org wrote:
You hit the nail on the head here. I see two real problems with his
messages:
1) he's force fitting every possible language feature he learns into
D. Clearly some features are useful, others are not, and this is why
many
Why not split this NG in two?
d-pragmatism - Concrete stuff, TDPL + absolutely necessary adjustments
which are probably discussed first in the other ng...
d-theory - A place to discuss the future of D, stuff with a longer timeline.
Or maybe we should accept this NG for being a mix of both and
Christopher Bergqvist:
Why not split this NG in two?
d-pragmatism - Concrete stuff, TDPL + absolutely necessary adjustments
which are probably discussed first in the other ng...
d-theory - A place to discuss the future of D, stuff with a longer timeline.
Or maybe we should accept this NG
Andrei Alexandrescu Wrote:
On 3/29/11 4:37 PM, so wrote:
[snip]
I find his posts among the most informative.
I don't meant to offend anyone here but I think it's worth making a
point for your benefit and others'. If you are interested in programming
language theory, probably there are
On Mon, 2011-03-28 at 17:31 -0400, bearophile wrote:
Walter:
There's a lot of money and manpower behind Python. If this were true,
why hasn't this technology been done for Python?
It has been and is being. The problem is complicated by the GIL, so it
is not a simple situation.
It was
On Tue, 2011-03-29 at 05:41 +0800, KennyTM~ wrote:
[ . . . ]
Psyco? (http://psyco.sourceforge.net/, though it seems to be stuck at 2.6)
If I remember correctly the author of Psyco explicitly stopped work on
it exactly because he moved to doing the JIT for PyPy . . .
PyPy also supports JITting
On Mon, 28 Mar 2011 21:54:27 -0400, jasonw u...@webmails.org wrote:
tastelessI can't keep wondering if he has Asperger
syndrome/tasteless.
I have no tolerance for this. I think the community shares this opinion.
Please please, instead of tagging stuff like this, just remove it.
Thanks
On 03/29/2011 07:47 AM, Don wrote:
dsimcha wrote:
On 3/28/2011 9:54 PM, jasonw wrote:
Listen kid, you're some biology student, right? You're just coding for fun.
And more importantly, you haven't participated in any long term real world
systems programming projects. This kind of work
On 3/29/2011 3:00 AM, Russel Winder wrote:
Which leads to the real point as to why Python is becoming the leading
language for scientific computing, it is a dynamic language for
coordinating C/C++/Fortran computations and providing GUI front ends.
Performance of Python is thus a side issue since
== Quote from Don (nos...@nospam.com)'s article
dsimcha wrote:
On 3/28/2011 9:54 PM, jasonw wrote:
Listen kid, you're some biology student, right? You're just coding for
fun. And more importantly, you haven't participated in any long term
real world systems programming projects. This kind
Listen kid, you're some biology student, right? You're just coding for
fun. And more importantly, you haven't participated in any long term
real world systems programming projects. This kind of work experience
doesn't give you the competence to evaluate the knowledge and work of
people
On 3/29/11 4:37 PM, so wrote:
[snip]
I find his posts among the most informative.
I don't meant to offend anyone here but I think it's worth making a
point for your benefit and others'. If you are interested in programming
language theory, probably there are better sources of information to
On Wed, 30 Mar 2011 02:04:04 +0300, Andrei Alexandrescu
seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote:
On 3/29/11 4:37 PM, so wrote:
[snip]
I find his posts among the most informative.
I don't meant to offend anyone here but I think it's worth making a
point for your benefit and others'. If you
I've been doing a lot of coding in D in the past few weeks, and one
thing I've noticed is that performance is not great. Surprisingly,
DMD generated binaries perform worse than GDC's, but even GDC is
lagging behind equivalent code written in C++ and compiled with G++.
Are we to expect performance
== Quote from Caligo (iteronve...@gmail.com)'s article
I've been doing a lot of coding in D in the past few weeks, and one
thing I've noticed is that performance is not great. Surprisingly,
DMD generated binaries perform worse than GDC's, but even GDC is
lagging behind equivalent code written
On 3/28/2011 9:09 AM, Caligo wrote:
I've been doing a lot of coding in D in the past few weeks, and one
thing I've noticed is that performance is not great. Surprisingly,
DMD generated binaries perform worse than GDC's, but even GDC is
lagging behind equivalent code written in C++ and compiled
== Quote from Walter Bright (newshou...@digitalmars.com)'s article
On 3/28/2011 9:09 AM, Caligo wrote:
I've been doing a lot of coding in D in the past few weeks, and one
thing I've noticed is that performance is not great. Surprisingly,
DMD generated binaries perform worse than GDC's, but
On 3/28/2011 11:49 AM, dsimcha wrote:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think some important optimizations (like
inlining)
are performed in the front end. It's pretty obvious that DMD's inliner needs
improvement, though I agree with Walter's decision to prioritize this below
fixing
major bugs,
Walter:
By fundamental technical issue, I mean things like Python's numeric types
which
require runtime testing for every operation, and are very resistant to known
techniques of optimization.
Life is a bit more complex than that:
- The Lua JIT has shown once and for all that dynamic
On 3/28/2011 1:12 PM, bearophile wrote:
Walter:
By fundamental technical issue, I mean things like Python's numeric types
which require runtime testing for every operation, and are very resistant
to known techniques of optimization.
Life is a bit more complex than that: - The Lua JIT has
Walter:
There's a lot of money and manpower behind Python. If this were true, why
hasn't this technology been done for Python?
It was done, more than one time. One good JIT was Psyco. And more recently PyPy
is about to surpass Psyco in performance:
http://codespeak.net/pypy/dist/pypy/doc/
But
On Mar 29, 11 04:33, Walter Bright wrote:
On 3/28/2011 1:12 PM, bearophile wrote:
Walter:
By fundamental technical issue, I mean things like Python's numeric
types
which require runtime testing for every operation, and are very
resistant
to known techniques of optimization.
Life is a bit
On 3/28/11 4:31 PM, bearophile wrote:
Walter:
There's a lot of money and manpower behind Python. If this were true, why hasn't
this technology been done for Python?
It was done, more than one time. One good JIT was Psyco. And more recently PyPy
is about to surpass Psyco in performance:
Andrei:
To be brutally honest, I'd say that this discussion (and a few others)
could be reduced to zero.
I have suggested the Google Summer of Code for D even the past year, and I
agree it's important for D future. But I think Walter has to know something
about modern JITs dynamic
On 3/28/11 5:47 PM, bearophile wrote:
Andrei:
To be brutally honest, I'd say that this discussion (and a few
others) could be reduced to zero.
I have suggested the Google Summer of Code for D even the past year,
and I agree it's important for D future. But I think Walter has to
know
Andrei Alexandrescu Wrote:
On 3/28/11 5:47 PM, bearophile wrote:
Andrei:
To be brutally honest, I'd say that this discussion (and a few
others) could be reduced to zero.
I have suggested the Google Summer of Code for D even the past year,
and I agree it's important for D future.
On 3/28/2011 9:54 PM, jasonw wrote:
Listen kid, you're some biology student, right? You're just coding for fun. And
more importantly, you haven't participated in any long term real world systems
programming projects. This kind of work experience doesn't give you the
competence to evaluate the
dsimcha Wrote:
On 3/28/2011 9:54 PM, jasonw wrote:
Listen kid, you're some biology student, right? You're just coding for fun.
And more importantly, you haven't participated in any long term real world
systems programming projects. This kind of work experience doesn't give you
the
dsimcha wrote:
On 3/28/2011 9:54 PM, jasonw wrote:
Listen kid, you're some biology student, right? You're just coding for
fun. And more importantly, you haven't participated in any long term
real world systems programming projects. This kind of work experience
doesn't give you the competence
,
for example, when enabling and disabling various sections.
Warnings have a cost. Sometimes they are locally wrong, becoming noise, so in
some situations people want to disable specific warnings locally (GCC 4.6 has
added ways to do this).
In some situations I agree that an error is better than
== Quote from bearophile (bearophileh...@lycos.com)'s article
Walter:
You quoted a claim saying it was also an optimization.
If GCC devs say so, then I presume they are right. But the main purpose of a
warning is to warn the programmer, in this case to avoid some bugs.
Warnings have no effect
test.d(4): Error: + has no effect in expression (x + y)
But currently this gives no errors, despite it's the same situation, so I'd
like
an error here too (this enhancement request is in Bugzilla already):
pure int add(int a, int b) { return a + b; }
void main() {
int x = 10;
int
Iain Buclaw:
I think it would be better if it were targeting memory/(re)allocation-related
functions.
ie:
{
new int[4096]; // allocation has no effect, other than leaking memory.
}
(The memory does not leak, the GC will deallocate it later).
In Bugzilla I have proposed that if you
On Mar 27, 11 22:30, bearophile wrote:
In Bugzilla I have proposed that if you call a pure function and you don't
assign its return value, then you have a bug, like the similar present in D for
unassigned expressions.
This should be restricted to *strongly* pure functions. Weakly pure
On Mar 27, 11 23:19, KennyTM~ wrote:
On Mar 27, 11 22:30, bearophile wrote:
In Bugzilla I have proposed that if you call a pure function and you
don't assign its return value, then you have a bug, like the similar
present in D for unassigned expressions.
This should be restricted to
== Quote from bearophile (bearophileh...@lycos.com)'s article
Iain Buclaw:
I think it would be better if it were targeting
memory/(re)allocation-related
functions.
ie:
{
new int[4096]; // allocation has no effect, other than leaking memory.
}
(The memory does not leak, the GC
KennyTM~:
This should be restricted to *strongly* pure functions.
Right, I have added the note. I have written the enhancement request 3882
before the introduction of the weakly pure ones.
Bye,
bearophile
On 3/27/2011 7:30 AM, bearophile wrote:
In Bugzilla I have proposed that if you call a pure function and you don't
assign its return value, then you have a bug, like the similar present in D
for unassigned expressions.
I think that's a reasonable proposal.
Walter:
On 3/27/2011 7:30 AM, bearophile wrote:
In Bugzilla I have proposed that if you call a pure function and you don't
assign its return value, then you have a bug, like the similar present in D
for unassigned expressions.
I think that's a reasonable proposal.
:-) Thank you. This
Some changes in the new version of GCC, 4.6:
New warnings (I want something similar in D too):
New -Wunused-but-set-variable and -Wunused-but-set-parameter warnings were
added for C, C++, Objective-C and Objective-C++. These warnings diagnose
variables respective parameters which are only set
On 3/26/11 4:51 PM, bearophile wrote:
Some changes in the new version of GCC, 4.6:
[snip]
Heh, I was just following the reddit discussion, in which D vs. Go was
due to appear:
http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/gbzvv/gcc_46_is_released/
Andrei
On Mar 27, 11 05:51, bearophile wrote:
I don't undersatand why this is useful, why the compiler isn't able to infer
this by itself:
A new function attribute leaf was introduced. This attribute allows better
inter-procedural optimization across calls to functions that return to the current
Am 26.03.2011, 22:51 Uhr, schrieb bearophile bearophileh...@lycos.com:
Some changes in the new version of GCC, 4.6:
Link-Time Optimizations is now more powerful:
GCC itself, Mozilla Firefox and other large applications can be built
with LTO enabled.
LTO ftw!
KennyTM~:
Just calling convention stuff.
Oh, right, now I understand that changelog comment :-)
Bye,
bearophile
On 3/26/2011 2:51 PM, bearophile wrote:
This seems useful:
The -Wshadow option now warns if a local variable or type declaration
shadows another type in C++. Note that the compiler will not warn if a
local variable shadows a struct/class/enum, but will warn if it shadows an
explicit typedef.
But not this:
Sorry, I meant: But not this yet :-)
Bye,
bearophile
Walter:
D already does this.
and this.
But not this:
New -Wunused-but-set-variable and -Wunused-but-set-parameter warnings were
added for C, C++, Objective-C and Objective-C++. These warnings diagnose
variables respective parameters which are only set in the code and never
otherwise used.
On 3/26/2011 6:28 PM, bearophile wrote:
Walter:
D already does this. and this.
But not this:
New -Wunused-but-set-variable and -Wunused-but-set-parameter warnings were
added for C, C++, Objective-C and Objective-C++. These warnings diagnose
variables respective parameters which are only
do you mean the warnings GCC 4.6 shows you when you add the
-Wunused-but-set-variable to the switches? I have not tried GCC4.6 yet, but
GCC 4.5 has a related warning, for unused variables. This warning is present in
the C# compiler too, and it's also present in a C lint I use (and probably
GCC 4.7 Stage 1 has begun. Does anyone know if GDC is schedule for inclusion?
On 3/26/2011 7:10 PM, bearophile wrote:
The optimizer removes those as dead assignments, so no value is computed
needlessly or expensively.
The point of those warnings is NOT to improve code/compiler optimizations,
but just to help programmers catch their bugs better.
You quoted a claim
On 2011-03-26 22:03, Walter Bright wrote:
I get told I'm wrong on just about everything I do.
No, you're wrong about that! ;)
- Jonathan M Davis
On 25 November 2010 01:15, Iain Buclaw ibuc...@ubuntu.com wrote:
== Quote from Emil Madsen (sove...@gmail.com)'s article
--90e6ba539f3ee121840495d5033f
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
On 25 November 2010 00:25, Walter Bright newshou...@digitalmars.com
wrote:
Emil Madsen
On Wed, 24 Nov 2010 22:39:02 +0100
Emil Madsen sove...@gmail.com wrote:
On 24 November 2010 21:40, Bruno Medeiros
brunodomedeiros+s...@com.gmailwrote:
On 31/10/2010 02:47, bearophile wrote:
Walter:
You post lists of features every day.
I hate wasting your time, so please
== Quote from Emil Madsen (sove...@gmail.com)'s article
--0015174c37fe0831b20495dd37b5
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
On 25 November 2010 01:15, Iain Buclaw ibuc...@ubuntu.com wrote:
== Quote from Emil Madsen (sove...@gmail.com)'s article
--90e6ba539f3ee121840495d5033f
On 31/10/2010 16:08, Don wrote:
Simen kjaeraas wrote:
Nick Sabalausky a...@a.a wrote:
I can certainly understand the impossibility of actually keeping up with
bearophile, but I don't think that even he expects that every idea he
brings
up be rushed into D.
Yeah, I always see bearophile's
Feel free to correct me, I don't claim to have made a complete or fully
accurate assessment of all the posts and proposal changes that were
discussed in the last 3-4 months or so.
Sorry but you are a bit harsh here.
If you go back, you'll see some very nice posts of him but recently his
To paraphrase a famous that best describes my view of things when it
comes to
features:
#8206;``Perfection (in design) is achieved not when there is nothing
more to add, but
rather when there is nothing more to take away.''
Regards
Would that apply to PL design as well?
You actually
so Wrote:
Feel free to correct me, I don't claim to have made a complete or fully
accurate assessment of all the posts and proposal changes that were
discussed in the last 3-4 months or so.
Sorry but you are a bit harsh here.
If you go back, you'll see some very nice posts of him
On 01/11/2010 01:23, Walter Bright wrote:
... , DOS support, ...
DOS support?... That's quite telling.
I can't say I view that as a positive, either for DMC or the people who
prefer it. In fact, I find quite the contrary.
--
Bruno Medeiros - Software Engineer
Bruno Medeiros wrote:
DOS support?... That's quite telling.
It's great. DMC making DOS programs is how I got started. Still
play around with it from time to time. The simple simplicity
of the simple era was just so much simpler.
(I've never used it professionally, but I'm sure lots of people
On 31/10/2010 23:20, Walter Bright wrote:
retard wrote:
Around 2005, interest in the Ruby language surged in tandem with Ruby
on Rails, a popular web application framework written in Ruby. Rails
is frequently credited with making Ruby famous and the association
is so strong that the two are
On 31/10/2010 02:47, bearophile wrote:
Walter:
You post lists of features every day.
I hate wasting your time, so please ignore my posts you aren't interested in. I
write those things because I like to think and discuss about new ways to
explain semantics to computers. Most of those things
On 24 November 2010 21:40, Bruno Medeiros brunodomedeiros+s...@com.gmailwrote:
On 31/10/2010 02:47, bearophile wrote:
Walter:
You post lists of features every day.
I hate wasting your time, so please ignore my posts you aren't interested
in. I write those things because I like to think
Emil Madsen wrote:
And yea, bearophile brings up a lot of nice features, and Walter would
never have a chance to implement all of them himself, which might be
good, if everything bearophile suggests got into the language, we would
have this major language noone would ever be able to learn, nor
On 25 November 2010 00:25, Walter Bright newshou...@digitalmars.com wrote:
Emil Madsen wrote:
And yea, bearophile brings up a lot of nice features, and Walter would
never have a chance to implement all of them himself, which might be good,
if everything bearophile suggests got into the
== Quote from Emil Madsen (sove...@gmail.com)'s article
--90e6ba539f3ee121840495d5033f
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
On 25 November 2010 00:25, Walter Bright newshou...@digitalmars.com wrote:
Emil Madsen wrote:
And yea, bearophile brings up a lot of nice features, and
dsimcha wrote:
== Quote from Christopher Bergqvist (quasiconsci...@gmail.com)'s article
Would it be possible to organize a bounty for having the backend released u
nder an OSI-approved license?
Vote++. I understand that this has worked in the past, though I don't
remember
off the top of
Yes, I don't want to run Walter into bankruptcy though. ;)
Honestly, I do think it would change the perception of the language in a
beneficial way if one could say that the whole reference compiler
infrastructure were _unquestionably_ open source.
On Nov 3, 2010, at 21:17, Jérôme M. Berger
old news
here:
http://software.intel.com/en-us/blogs/2009/05/27/why-we-chose-llvm/
On further reading, it seems that the reason LLVM is not the focus is
answered in the previous thread about gcc 4.6. To paraphrase, the
answer is not just lackluster Windows support, but also that Walter
has
On 01.11.2010 05:43, SK wrote:
On Sun, Oct 31, 2010 at 9:19 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu
seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org wrote:
No Windows?
My Google-fu shows most complaints related to LLVM on Windows are
actually clang problems. I also came across this, but maybe old news
here:
On Sun, 31 Oct 2010 14:12:04 -0700, Walter Bright
newshou...@digitalmars.com wrote:
Sometimes I feel people are just waiting around, wanting to use D,
but waiting
for someone else to make the first move. It's like a dance club,
where everyone
With Python what happened for some years was that
Juanjo Alvarez wrote:
With Python what happened for some years was that some companies were
using it for lots of internal project, but not disclosing its use, for
fear that the upper management could scream, whats that python crap!
That is not java! I know because I worked on one of them (a
On Mon, 01 Nov 2010 11:14:09 -0700
Walter == Walter Bright wrote:
Walter I appreciate you having the courage to stand up to the critics.
Walter I hope we can ensure that your choice turns out to be a big win
Walter for you.
Well, I learnt that judging someone based on his (its) past is in the
Well, let me say that both languages seem to be doing much better than D.
Java like it or not, is the number one language in Europe. If you know Java
or
C++ well, even with the current crisis, it's quite easy to get a job in the
IT sector.
As for Haskell, for sure it is an academic language
On 31/10/10 10:59 AM, Paulo Pinto wrote:
What I found is that D also shares some fate with Java. Many people have a
bad opinion about
Java due to issues that are no longer true. In D's case many people still
refer to Tango\Phobos
issues and community issues.
These things go away with time.
Simen kjaeraas wrote:
Nick Sabalausky a...@a.a wrote:
I can certainly understand the impossibility of actually keeping up with
bearophile, but I don't think that even he expects that every idea he
brings
up be rushed into D.
Yeah, I always see bearophile's lists as 'maybe some of this
Don Wrote:
Simen kjaeraas wrote:
Nick Sabalausky a...@a.a wrote:
I can certainly understand the impossibility of actually keeping up with
bearophile, but I don't think that even he expects that every idea he
brings
up be rushed into D.
Yeah, I always see bearophile's lists as
retard wrote:
Bearophile often compares DMD to world class products such as LLVM. Even
though Walter might be the best compiler writer in this world, he can't
compete with a motivated team of professionals.
What irritated me about bearophile's comparison of dmd to LLVM is he would say
things
On Sun, 2010-10-31 at 11:14 -0700, Walter Bright wrote:
[ . . . ]
Yes, I know people just assume dmd doesn't do things because it is a small
team.
[ . . . ]
Where the large teams pay off, though, is the breadth of the offering.
I appreciate this is going off topic somewhat for the list,
Walter Bright newshou...@digitalmars.com wrote in message
news:iakbog$2ra...@digitalmars.com...
Back in the days of competitive compiler benchmarks, my compiler often won
them, up against those well paid huge compiler teams from MS, Borland,
etc. A friend told me once that the head of one
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
Russel Winder wrote:
I appreciate this is going off topic somewhat for the list, never mind
the original posting, but I think summarizing this issue should be
constructive -- albeit me seemingly acting as Devil's Advocate. (NB
This is not a troll, for me these are serious issues -- I am a
Some (arguably rhetorical) questions:
I know you said rhetorical but I can't help chiming in on some of them
anyway ;) Some of these below may sound, umm, troll-ish, but they really
are my honest opinion:
Why did Google push Go rather than use D when they became
dissatisfied with C, C++, etc.
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
Sun, 31 Oct 2010 14:12:04 -0700, Walter Bright wrote:
Russel Winder wrote:
I appreciate this is going off topic somewhat for the list, never mind
the original posting, but I think summarizing this issue should be
constructive -- albeit me seemingly acting as Devil's Advocate. (NB
This is
== Quote from Nick Sabalausky (a...@a.a)'s article
I'm starting to
think the problem D faces with adoption is that it *doesn't* suck. If it
did, people would probably be all over it.
I know you're kidding, but ironically you may be right in a way. Sometimes D
needs to realize that worse is
On 10/31/2010 05:12 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
D is fully open source.
No, Walter, it isn't, and you should know this by now considering all
the past discussion. All the back-end work you're doing is source
available. Open source was coined in 1998 by people with a precise
meaning: See
dsimcha wrote:
== Quote from Walter Bright (newshou...@digitalmars.com)'s article
van Rossum's. And on and on. (Perl, Python, Ruby, have only one implementation.)
Nitpick (since your overall post was mostly on target): Python has Jython and
IronPython and PyPy. Ruby has JRuby and IronRuby.
Jeff Nowakowski wrote:
On 10/31/2010 05:12 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
D is fully open source.
No, Walter, it isn't, and you should know this by now considering all
the past discussion. All the back-end work you're doing is source
available. Open source was coined in 1998 by people with a
Interestingly, what goes along with the discussion about the perception of D
as a language is what happened to IronPython and IronRuby. Microsoft
initially showed a whole lot of support for those two languages, and
assembled teams to work on both. That caused a big surge in their
popularities.
dsimcha wrote:
I know you're kidding, but ironically you may be right in a way. Sometimes D
needs to realize that worse is better. For example: The discussion on
arbitrary
cost copy construction. It's silly to contort half of Phobos to efficiently
support a paradigm that is only used in a
Sun, 31 Oct 2010 15:27:03 -0700, Walter Bright wrote:
dsimcha wrote:
== Quote from Walter Bright (newshou...@digitalmars.com)'s article
van Rossum's. And on and on. (Perl, Python, Ruby, have only one
implementation.)
Nitpick (since your overall post was mostly on target): Python has
retard wrote:
Sun, 31 Oct 2010 14:01:02 -0700, Walter Bright wrote:
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
retard wrote:
Around 2005, interest in the Ruby language surged in tandem with Ruby on
Rails, a popular web application framework written in Ruby. Rails is
frequently credited with making Ruby famous and the association is so
strong that the two are sometimes conflated by programmers who are
Would it be possible to organize a bounty for having the backend released
under an OSI-approved license?
On Oct 31, 2010, at 22:48, Jeff Nowakowski j...@dilacero.org wrote:
On 10/31/2010 05:12 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
D is fully open source.
No, Walter, it isn't, and you should know this
1 - 100 of 119 matches
Mail list logo
