On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 07:54:49 UTC, Suliman wrote:
I like D, but sometimes it's look like for me too complicated.
Go have a lot of fans even it not simple, but primitive. But
some D futures make it very hard to learning.
Small list by me:
1. mixins
2. inout
3. too many attributes like:
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 19:01:30 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
If somebody *paid* me to work on dub, then perhaps I will. But
right now, my level of motivation and interest in doing so is
pretty low, and is on the losing side of the competition
against the myriad other projects that I could be
On 15.02.2018 21:38, Walter Bright wrote:
On 2/10/2018 4:35 AM, Timon Gehr wrote:
In summary, the issue is that there is only one 'inout' and therefore
it is not properly lexically scoped. It is a bit like having a
language where all variables are implicit function parameters and they
all have
On 2/10/2018 4:35 AM, Timon Gehr wrote:
In summary, the issue is that there is only one 'inout' and therefore it is not
properly lexically scoped. It is a bit like having a language where all
variables are implicit function parameters and they all have the same, global,
name. This sort of works
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'
On Tuesday, 13 February 2018 at 11:36:50 UTC, Andre Pany wrote:
On Tuesday, 13 February 2018 at 11:14:25 UTC, rikki cattermole
wrote:
On 13/02/2018 11:11 AM, Russel Winder wrote:
On Tue, 2018-02-13 at 10:45 +, aberba via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
[…]
I wish complaints about Dub would include
On Tuesday, 13 February 2018 at 11:14:25 UTC, rikki cattermole
wrote:
On 13/02/2018 11:11 AM, Russel Winder wrote:
On Tue, 2018-02-13 at 10:45 +, aberba via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
[…]
I wish complaints about Dub would include exactly what was
impossible with it. There's no reason to throw
On 13/02/2018 11:11 AM, Russel Winder wrote:
On Tue, 2018-02-13 at 10:45 +, aberba via Digitalmars-d wrote:
[…]
I wish complaints about Dub would include exactly what was
impossible with it. There's no reason to throw dub away and start
something new. If one can run cmake before build in
On Tue, 2018-02-13 at 10:45 +, aberba via Digitalmars-d wrote:
>
[…]
> I wish complaints about Dub would include exactly what was
> impossible with it. There's no reason to throw dub away and start
> something new. If one can run cmake before build in dub, then a
> lot is possible. Those e
On 13/02/2018 10:45 AM, aberba wrote:
On Sunday, 11 February 2018 at 11:47:25 UTC, rikki cattermole wrote:
snip
Will it result in binaries that are decent? Probably not for most use
cases.
Can you file a bug report on this?
Nah this should remain out of scope.
If binary (from e.g. cmake) e
On Sunday, 11 February 2018 at 11:47:25 UTC, rikki cattermole
wrote:
On 11/02/2018 11:40 AM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Sunday, February 11, 2018 11:26:30 rikki cattermole via
Digitalmars-d
wrote:
On 11/02/2018 11:18 AM, Russel Winder wrote:
Clearly though there is a problem with Dub as a buil
On 2018-02-09 08:54, Suliman wrote:
I like D, but sometimes it's look like for me too complicated. Go have a
lot of fans even it not simple, but primitive. But some D futures make
it very hard to learning.
Small list by me:
1. mixins
2. inout
3. too many attributes like: @safe @system @nogc etc
On Sun, 2018-02-11 at 19:31 -0700, Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
>
[…]
> On that note, I feel that I really should thank Sonke and those few
> that
> have helped him write dub. As much as I think that some aspects of
> dub need
> to be redesigned, at least they actually went and did so
On 02/11/2018 09:01 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Sunday, February 11, 2018 20:30:19 Nick Sabalausky via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
The langauge-based package managers just simply need to keep
"buildsystem" OUT of the package manager's scope. That's all. THAT is
why system-level packages can be buil
On Monday, 12 February 2018 at 02:31:38 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
On Sunday, February 11, 2018 19:01:09 Jonathan M Davis via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
As with too much around here, a big part of the issue is
ultimately man power. Even if we could all agree on exactly
how D's build and package man
On 02/10/2018 07:35 AM, Timon Gehr wrote:
TL;DR: Parametrically polymorphic functions have /runtime/ type
parameters. inout can be interpreted as a dependent function of type
"{type y | y.among(x, const(x), immutable(x)) } delegate(type x)" and an
inout function can be thought of as a functio
On Sunday, February 11, 2018 19:01:09 Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
> As with too much around here, a big part of the issue is ultimately man
> power. Even if we could all agree on exactly how D's build and package
> management situation should be solved, actually get the work done is
On Sunday, February 11, 2018 20:30:19 Nick Sabalausky via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
> The langauge-based package managers just simply need to keep
> "buildsystem" OUT of the package manager's scope. That's all. THAT is
> why system-level packages can be built with whatever tool: because the
> one thin
On Monday, 12 February 2018 at 01:45:42 UTC, Nick Sabalausky
(Abscissa) wrote:
But if you're putting out a D lib, you can't do that because
people expect a lib to be part of a package system (for good
reason).
Yeah, this drives me nuts too. Most "bugs" I hear are just dub
being weird (like mi
On 02/11/2018 06:47 AM, rikki cattermole wrote:
Dub can do everything that you have described.
No it can't. Not if you value your time and sanity.
You are fully free to run cmake if you wish before the build. Will it
result in binaries that are decent? Probably not for most use cases.
I
On 02/11/2018 06:18 AM, Russel Winder wrote:
Clearly though there is a problem with Dub as a build system for many
of it's users – or rather people who try and reject.
The problem isn't just "dub as a buildsystem". The other equally big
problem here is that "dub as a package manager" pretty
On 02/11/2018 01:54 AM, Pjotr Prins wrote:
Dub is getting some flak here. This is unsurprising because it is really
hard to write a good package manager and build system. I use a lot of
languages and not one has a satisfactory package manager. Mostly they
try to do too much and get in the way o
On 11/02/2018 11:40 AM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
On Sunday, February 11, 2018 11:26:30 rikki cattermole via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
On 11/02/2018 11:18 AM, Russel Winder wrote:
Clearly though there is a problem with Dub as a build system for many
of it's users – or rather people who try and reject.
On Sunday, February 11, 2018 11:26:30 rikki cattermole via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
> On 11/02/2018 11:18 AM, Russel Winder wrote:
> > Clearly though there is a problem with Dub as a build system for many
> > of it's users – or rather people who try and reject.
>
> Put simply, they expect far too much
On 11/02/2018 11:18 AM, Russel Winder wrote:
On Sun, 2018-02-11 at 10:59 +, rikki cattermole via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
[…]
I was working on my own build system with dependency management when
dub
was created. I stopped after dub was first released because it meet
my
every need for a D bui
On Sun, 2018-02-11 at 10:59 +, rikki cattermole via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
>
[…]
> I was working on my own build system with dependency management when
> dub
> was created. I stopped after dub was first released because it meet
> my
> every need for a D build manager.
Hopefully it still work
On 2/9/2018 11:13 AM, Manu wrote:
1. Storage class as a concept separate to the type;
void test() {
int x;
static int y;
typeof(x) != typeof(y) ???
}
On 11/02/2018 10:54 AM, Russel Winder wrote:
On Fri, 2018-02-09 at 17:20 -0500, Nick Sabalausky (Abscissa) via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
[…]
Been there, done that, put enormous work into it, a TON of arguing
to
little avail, found the code architecture difficult to work with,
and
ultimately my mer
On Fri, 2018-02-09 at 17:20 -0500, Nick Sabalausky (Abscissa) via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
>
[…]
> Been there, done that, put enormous work into it, a TON of arguing
> to
> little avail, found the code architecture difficult to work with,
> and
> ultimately my merged PRs barely made a dent at solvin
On Saturday, 10 February 2018 at 20:50:37 UTC, Jon Degenhardt
wrote:
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 07:54:49 UTC, Suliman wrote:
Which language futures by your opinion make D harder?
* Static arrays aren't not ranges. I continually forget to
slice them when I want to use them as ranges. The co
Dub is getting some flak here. This is unsurprising because it is
really hard to write a good package manager and build system. I
use a lot of languages and not one has a satisfactory package
manager. Mostly they try to do too much and get in the way or
they do too little and people complain (I
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 07:54:49 UTC, Suliman wrote:
I like D, but sometimes it's look like for me too complicated.
Go have a lot of fans even it not simple, but primitive. But
some D futures make it very hard to learning.
Small list by me:
1. mixins
2. inout
3. too many attributes like:
On Saturday, February 10, 2018 20:57:44 John Gabriele via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
> On Saturday, 10 February 2018 at 20:55:00 UTC, John Gabriele
>
> wrote:
> > {snip} It's not niche at all, it just doesn't have hoards of
> > users. D is well-positioned to be hugely popular, but I think
> > to succeed
On Saturday, 10 February 2018 at 20:55:00 UTC, John Gabriele
wrote:
{snip} It's not niche at all, it just doesn't have hoards of
users. D is well-positioned to be hugely popular, but I think
to succeed its leadership needs to be willing to fix things
they want to fix and not worry about break
On Saturday, 10 February 2018 at 12:44:14 UTC, rjframe wrote:
On Fri, 09 Feb 2018 22:36:19 +, Ralph Doncaster wrote:
Frankly, I think it is doomed to be a niche-use language.
While many more things were done right compared to C++, too
many things were done wrong and there doesn't seem to
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 07:54:49 UTC, Suliman wrote:
Which language futures by your opinion make D harder?
For me, one of the attractive qualities of D is its relative
simplicity. Key comparison points are C++, Scala, and Python.
Python being the simplest, then D, not far off, with Scal
On 10.02.2018 14:05, Mark wrote:
On Saturday, 10 February 2018 at 12:35:39 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
So as expected, the difference is that for parametrically polymorphic
functions, the type T /does not need to be known at compile time/.
According to this definition C++ doesn't support parametric
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 23:01:44 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad
wrote:
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 20:49:24 UTC, Meta wrote:
was a complicated language, 99 of them would say no. If you
ask 100 Python programmers, 99 would probably say yes.
Yes, but objectively speaking I'd say modern Python
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 22:36:19 UTC, Ralph Doncaster wrote:
While many more things were done right compared to C++, too
many things were done wrong and there doesn't seem to be
interest in breaking backward compatibility to excise them from
D.
I agree. Some users might shout because t
On Saturday, 10 February 2018 at 12:35:39 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
So as expected, the difference is that for parametrically
polymorphic functions, the type T /does not need to be known at
compile time/.
According to this definition C++ doesn't support parametric
polymorphism either, does it? A
On Fri, 09 Feb 2018 22:36:19 +, Ralph Doncaster wrote:
> Frankly, I think it is doomed to be a niche-use language. While many
> more things were done right compared to C++, too many things were done
> wrong and there doesn't seem to be interest in breaking backward
> compatibility to excise t
On 10.02.2018 03:12, Nick Sabalausky wrote:
On Saturday, 10 February 2018 at 01:24:55 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
The fundamental issue is that D's type system has no parametric
polymorphism,
Pardon my ignorance, but isn't that what D's templated functions do?
This sounds interesting but unclear e
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 18:31:18 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
TBH, I'm not a fan of inout. Not because of how most people
feel, that we shouldn't have it; IMO it doesn't go *far
enough*. For example, there's currently no way to express
conveying the constness of a delegate argument's paramet
On Saturday, 10 February 2018 at 01:24:55 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
The fundamental issue is that D's type system has no parametric
polymorphism,
Pardon my ignorance, but isn't that what D's templated functions
do? This sounds interesting but unclear exactly what you mean
here and how it relates
On 09.02.2018 19:31, H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Fri, Feb 09, 2018 at 05:56:38PM +, Dukc via Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 07:54:49 UTC, Suliman wrote:
Which language futures by your opinion make D harder?
Not many! D is a fairly complex languague, but just about everything
f
On 09.02.2018 19:34, Seb wrote:
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 18:21:55 UTC, Bo wrote:
Here are a few more "basics" that are unneeded or confusing. Lets not
even talk about the more advanced features like inout, ...
/-/
* auto: Static typed language yet we fall back on the compiler to
figure
On 02/09/2018 06:03 PM, H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Fri, Feb 09, 2018 at 05:13:51PM -0500, Nick Sabalausky (Abscissa) via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
On 02/09/2018 02:01 PM, H. S. Teoh wrote:
Currently, my vibe.d project has a subdirectory containing an empty
dummy dub project, the sole purpose of which is
On 02/09/2018 05:55 PM, H. S. Teoh wrote:
When I found D, I had already been chafing for *years* under the hell
that C++ development was, but could not stand the thought of moving to
Java, because it was just (1) too verbose, and (2) not powerful enough
to express what I want. (That was in the d
On 02/09/2018 05:49 PM, H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Fri, Feb 09, 2018 at 05:49:31PM -0500, Nick Sabalausky (Abscissa) via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
Really? That's not been my perception.
From what I've seen, anything that requires the user to mixin a
string, is pretty much automatically granted the blac
On Friday, February 09, 2018 14:49:42 H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 09, 2018 at 05:49:31PM -0500, Nick Sabalausky (Abscissa) via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
> > On 02/09/2018 05:20 PM, H. S. Teoh wrote:
> > > Sadly, these days it seems almost every other day somebody else
> > > stumbl
On Fri, Feb 09, 2018 at 05:13:51PM -0500, Nick Sabalausky (Abscissa) via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On 02/09/2018 02:01 PM, H. S. Teoh wrote:
> > Currently, my vibe.d project has a subdirectory containing an empty
> > dummy dub project, the sole purpose of which is to declare vibe.d
> > dependencies s
On Fri, Feb 09, 2018 at 05:41:28PM -0500, Nick Sabalausky (Abscissa) via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On 02/09/2018 04:27 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> >
> > I have to agree with all of this. I've never found D as a whole to
> > be overly complicated. C++ wins _that_ contest hands down. And I've
> > fo
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 20:49:24 UTC, Meta wrote:
was a complicated language, 99 of them would say no. If you ask
100 Python programmers, 99 would probably say yes.
Yes, but objectively speaking I'd say modern Python is more
complicated than C++ and D.
What Python got right is that you
On Fri, Feb 09, 2018 at 05:49:31PM -0500, Nick Sabalausky (Abscissa) via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On 02/09/2018 05:20 PM, H. S. Teoh wrote:
> >
> > Sadly, these days it seems almost every other day somebody else
> > stumbles into a problem to which string mixins seem to be the
> > default answer.
>
On Fri, Feb 09, 2018 at 10:22:01PM +, rumbu via Digitalmars-d wrote:
[...]
> Personally, I don't use dub. If I need some library, I download and
> add it to my library import path. The only way that dub will convince
> me will be a right click context menu on my VS project entitled
> "Manage DU
On 02/09/2018 05:20 PM, H. S. Teoh wrote:
Sadly,
these days it seems almost every other day somebody else stumbles into a
problem to which string mixins seem to be the default answer.
Really? That's not been my perception.
From what I've seen, anything that requires the user to mixin a strin
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 21:05:10 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
On Fri, Feb 09, 2018 at 08:49:24PM +, Meta via
Digitalmars-d wrote: [...]
I think the perception of D being complicated is more from
programmers coming from Python/Ruby/JS (and to a lesser
extent, Haskell/Scheme/Java). D is quite
On 02/09/2018 04:27 PM, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
I have to agree with all of this. I've never found D as a whole to be overly
complicated. C++ wins _that_ contest hands down. And I've found languages
like Java to be overly simple (e.g. one of my professors in college said
that Java didn't become
On Fri, Feb 09, 2018 at 01:36:50PM -0800, Manu wrote:
>On 9 February 2018 at 11:19, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d
><[1]digitalmars-d@puremagic.com> wrote:
>
> > 3. string mixins always used in place of some sort of more
> >sanitary macro system
> [...]
>
> That g
On 02/09/2018 04:58 PM, rumbu wrote:
It's not about how nice is a solution, it's about how easy is for
someone to find out about a language feature and use it. D has a library
solution for everything that is missing from the core language instead
to include in the language well proven pattern
On 02/09/2018 01:13 PM, Russel Winder wrote:
On Fri, 2018-02-09 at 16:10 +, Seb via Digitalmars-d wrote:
[…]
Dub is not dead, it just has limited resources.
So , if the D community want Dub to work as a build system as well as a
package manager, extend the resources by corralling the gr
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 15:53:47 UTC, Russel Winder wrote:
On Fri, 2018-02-09 at 14:04 +, rumbu via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
[…]
1. Keeps data in the %APPDATA%/Roaming folder. Connecting my
computer to the company network means that AD will sync
zillions of files on the company profile
On 02/09/2018 02:01 PM, H. S. Teoh wrote:
Currently, my vibe.d project has a subdirectory containing an empty
dummy dub project, the sole purpose of which is to declare vibe.d
dependencies so that `dub build` in that subdirectory will fetch and
build vibe.d and whatever else it may depend on, an
On 02/09/2018 10:55 AM, Russel Winder wrote:
Of course whilst people just moan nothing changes. It strikes me as
time to actively evolve Dub or replace it.
A replacement package manager[1] has been on my pet project wish list
for awhile, but so are a ton of other things and there's not much
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 16:35:47 UTC, Seb wrote:
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 15:06:49 UTC, rumbu wrote:
All understood, but just to get your mind set better, I would
have two quick follow-up questions if you don't mind.
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 15:06:49 UTC, rumbu wrote:
rough
On 02/09/2018 08:51 AM, Atila Neves wrote:
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 13:34:01 UTC, tetyys wrote:
Why do people hate dub? I think it's a great package manager and build
tool
Great package manager? Yes.
Great build tool? No.
I used to feel the same way, but honestly, at this point, I ha
On 02/09/2018 08:53 AM, Seb wrote:
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 13:10:16 UTC, rumbu wrote:
I'm missing too the yield return and await syntax in D every time.
What's wrong with the library solution from std.concurrency?
I can't speak for await, as I left C# for D long before it was introdu
On 9 February 2018 at 11:19, H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d <
digitalmars-d@puremagic.com> wrote:
>
> >3. string mixins always used in place of some sort of more sanitary
> >macro system
> [...]
>
> That gave me a double-take. "Sanitary" and "macro" in the same
> sentence?! That's just ...
On Friday, February 09, 2018 20:49:24 Meta via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 07:54:49 UTC, Suliman wrote:
> > I like D, but sometimes it's look like for me too complicated.
> > Go have a lot of fans even it not simple, but primitive. But
> > some D futures make it very hard t
On Fri, Feb 09, 2018 at 08:49:24PM +, Meta via Digitalmars-d wrote:
[...]
> I think the perception of D being complicated is more from programmers
> coming from Python/Ruby/JS (and to a lesser extent,
> Haskell/Scheme/Java). D is quite different if you're coming from a
> "VM" or "scripting" lan
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 19:08:36 UTC, John Gabriele wrote:
Would it make sense to split out dub's build functionality from
its package management? Separate sharp tools for separate jobs.
I've only heard of Atila's reggae today. Is reggae commonly
used among D users? Are there any show
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 07:54:49 UTC, Suliman wrote:
I like D, but sometimes it's look like for me too complicated.
Go have a lot of fans even it not simple, but primitive. But
some D futures make it very hard to learning.
Small list by me:
1. mixins
2. inout
3. too many attributes like:
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 18:44:08 UTC, Meta wrote:
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 18:21:55 UTC, Bo wrote:
* scope() .. just call it "defer" just as every other language
now does. It only confuses people who come from other
languages. Its now almost a standard. By using scope people
have ha
On Friday, February 09, 2018 15:48:42 Andrea Fontana via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
> On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 15:35:38 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
> > On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 15:27:18 UTC, Andrea Fontana
> >
> > wrote:
> >>> If you need to take the address of a constant, use immutable
> >>> or c
On Friday, February 09, 2018 15:33:30 Andrea Fontana via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
> On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 15:05:05 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
>
> wrote:
> > [...]
> > The reality of the matter is that shared is _supposed_ to
> > result in a bunch of compilation errors when you try to do
> > stuff t
On 8 February 2018 at 23:54, Suliman via Digitalmars-d
<[1]digitalmars-d@puremagic.com> wrote:
>
> I like D, but sometimes it's look like for me too complicated. Go
> have a lot of fans even it not simple, but primitive. But some D
> futures make it very hard to learning.
>
>
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 18:34:33 UTC, Seb wrote:
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 18:21:55 UTC, Bo wrote:
Here are a few more "basics" that are unneeded or confusing.
Lets not even talk about the more advanced features like
inout, ...
/-/
* auto: Static typed language yet we fall back on
On 8 February 2018 at 23:54, Suliman via Digitalmars-d <
digitalmars-d@puremagic.com> wrote:
> I like D, but sometimes it's look like for me too complicated. Go have a
> lot of fans even it not simple, but primitive. But some D futures make it
> very hard to learning.
>
> Small list by me:
> 1. mi
On Fri, Feb 09, 2018 at 06:20:32PM +, Atila Neves via Digitalmars-d wrote:
[...]
> I'm perfectly happy with dub-the-package-manager.
>
> As for dub-the-build-system, I already did something about it: I wrote
> reggae. Nearly all of the problems I've had with using dub to build
> have disappear
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 18:40:25 UTC, Seb wrote:
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 18:13:08 UTC, Russel Winder wrote:
On Fri, 2018-02-09 at 16:10 +, Seb via Digitalmars-d wrote:
[…]
Dub is not dead, it just has limited resources.
So , if the D community want Dub to work as a build sy
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 17:31:47 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 16:44:32 UTC, Seb wrote:
Forget inout, it's seldomly used and there have even attempts
to remove it from the language.
inout rox. I think this is more of a documentation
discoverability problem. We
On Fri, Feb 09, 2018 at 06:44:08PM +, Meta via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 18:21:55 UTC, Bo wrote:
> > * scope() .. just call it "defer" just as every other language now
> > does. It only confuses people who come from other languages. Its
> > now almost a standard. By
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 18:13:08 UTC, Russel Winder wrote:
On Fri, 2018-02-09 at 16:10 +, Seb via Digitalmars-d wrote:
[…]
Dub is not dead, it just has limited resources.
So , if the D community want Dub to work as a build system as
well as a package manager, extend the resources
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 18:21:55 UTC, Bo wrote:
* scope() .. just call it "defer" just as every other language
now does. It only confuses people who come from other
languages. Its now almost a standard. By using scope people
have have no clue that D has a defer. Took even me a while to
k
On Fri, Feb 09, 2018 at 05:56:38PM +, Dukc via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 07:54:49 UTC, Suliman wrote:
> > Which language futures by your opinion make D harder?
>
> Not many! D is a fairly complex languague, but just about everything
> feels like to be here for a good
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 18:21:55 UTC, Bo wrote:
[snip]
* scope() .. just call it "defer" just as every other language
now does. It only confuses people who come from other
languages. Its now almost a standard. By using scope people
have have no clue that D has a defer. Took even me a w
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 18:21:55 UTC, Bo wrote:
Here are a few more "basics" that are unneeded or confusing.
Lets not even talk about the more advanced features like inout,
...
/-/
* auto: Static typed language yet we fall back on the compiler
to figure out what is being assigned. Can
Here are a few more "basics" that are unneeded or confusing. Lets
not even talk about the more advanced features like inout, ...
/-/
* auto: Static typed language yet we fall back on the compiler to
figure out what is being assigned. Can just as well have a
interpreter language. It only encou
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 15:55:27 UTC, Russel Winder wrote:
On Fri, 2018-02-09 at 13:51 +, Atila Neves via
Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 13:34:01 UTC, tetyys wrote:
> On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 13:10:16 UTC, rumbu wrote:
> >
> > And not a language feature but I
On Fri, 2018-02-09 at 16:17 +, jmh530 via Digitalmars-d wrote:
>
[…]
>
> He's written a build tool:
>
> https://github.com/atilaneves/reggae
Indeed, but it seems to be gaining no traction in the community. Dub
has the mindshare, because of the package repository.
--
Russel.
=
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 15:25:51 UTC, jmh530 wrote:
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 13:47:51 UTC, Atila Neves wrote:
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 08:27:21 UTC, Nick Sabalausky
And yes, things like "inout", "auto ref" or whatever, and
such, strike me as indicative of more fundamental desi
On Fri, 2018-02-09 at 16:10 +, Seb via Digitalmars-d wrote:
>
[…]
> Dub is not dead, it just has limited resources.
So , if the D community want Dub to work as a build system as well as a
package manager, extend the resources by corralling the grumblers and
support them into fixing code and c
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 07:54:49 UTC, Suliman wrote:
Which language futures by your opinion make D harder?
Not many! D is a fairly complex languague, but just about
everything feels like to be here for a good reason. That includes
many oft-hated things: inout, auto ref, goto, BetterC...
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 16:44:32 UTC, Seb wrote:
Forget inout, it's seldomly used and there have even attempts
to remove it from the language.
inout rox. I think this is more of a documentation
discoverability problem. We should be having people read the
spec, which is written toward co
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 16:33:21 UTC, bachmeier wrote:
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 16:05:52 UTC, Ralph Doncaster
wrote:
It might be clear and simple to you, but it's not to me. And
I'm a rather advanced developer.
While there are lots of things I like about D compared to C++
such as
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 16:05:52 UTC, Ralph Doncaster wrote:
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 15:46:56 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 15:37:12 UTC, Ralph Doncaster
wrote:
I think you are proving my point. You say there is no
difference between:
const MAX_IN = 20;
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 15:06:49 UTC, rumbu wrote:
All understood, but just to get your mind set better, I would
have two quick follow-up questions if you don't mind.
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 15:06:49 UTC, rumbu wrote:
rough C# translation:
async void spawnedFunc()
{
int i =
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 16:05:52 UTC, Ralph Doncaster wrote:
It might be clear and simple to you, but it's not to me. And
I'm a rather advanced developer.
While there are lots of things I like about D compared to C++
such as getting rid of #include hell, there's too many "messy"
things
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 15:55:27 UTC, Russel Winder wrote:
Great build tool? No. For anything that's not trivial it's an
exercise in frustration, pain, tears, waiting for builds to
finish, and workarounds for bugs.
Of course whilst people just moan nothing changes. It strikes
me as ti
On Friday, 9 February 2018 at 15:53:47 UTC, Russel Winder wrote:
Have you put forward a pull request to fix it, and tests
obviously.
4 year old issues just mean no-one cares about it enough to do
something.
4 year old pull requests is time to fork the project with a new
team of developers.
1 - 100 of 133 matches
Mail list logo