www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D - Changing the name of the language?

reply "ixid" <nuaccount gmail.com> writes:
D is a very poor name for a language. I appreciate it's late in 
the day for this and that it has probably been discussed before 
(not that I could find such a discussion with Google which 
relates to my point). Although the results for D are fine when 
googling for things like "D tutorial", more obscure terms are 
hard to find because "d" is so commonly used as a variable name. 
Searchability is important though I understand that this might be 
seen as a trivial point, it is a major human factor. The language 
would be far better off with a 3 to 5 letter identifier. It will 
succeed or fail for other reasons but an easily searchable name 
would help. Dlang as the search term isn't good enough because 
it's not actually the language's name, people don't use it that 
much when referring to D, nor do they usually use D2.
Mar 15 2012
next sibling parent bioinfornatics <bioinfornatics fedoraproject.org> writes:
Le vendredi 16 mars 2012 =C3=A0 02:23 +0100, ixid a =C3=A9crit :

 D is a very poor name for a language. I appreciate it's late in=20
 the day for this and that it has probably been discussed before=20
 (not that I could find such a discussion with Google which=20
 relates to my point). Although the results for D are fine when=20
 googling for things like "D tutorial", more obscure terms are=20
 hard to find because "d" is so commonly used as a variable name.=20
 Searchability is important though I understand that this might be=20
 seen as a trivial point, it is a major human factor. The language=20
 would be far better off with a 3 to 5 letter identifier. It will=20
 succeed or fail for other reasons but an easily searchable name=20
 would help. Dlang as the search term isn't good enough because=20
 it's not actually the language's name, people don't use it that=20
 much when referring to D, nor do they usually use D2.


as you said, we have already talk about this. yes D is not really a good
name for search on the web. Commonly we use these keywords:
- TDPL
- dlang
- d programming
- d tuto
- d wiki

regards
Mar 15 2012
prev sibling next sibling parent Kevin Cox <kevincox.ca gmail.com> writes:
On Mar 15, 2012 9:25 PM, "ixid" <nuaccount gmail.com> wrote:

 D is a very poor name for a language


I like dpl and post tagged with it would turn up pretty well in google.
But, as dlang is the website I think that is the best.  Most blogs and
fourms have a tag feature and you could always just say it in your post. "D
(dlang.org)"  google will pick up the url really nicely.  I don't think the
name is a problem, people who write about D just have to get system going
and search engines will catch on.  Especially now that the dlang.org site
is official the problem will only fade.
Mar 15 2012
prev sibling next sibling parent "bearophile" <bearophileHUGS lycos.com> writes:
ixid:


 Searchability is important though I understand that this might 
 be seen as a trivial point, it is a major human factor. The 
 language would be far better off with a 3 to 5 letter 
 identifier. It will succeed or fail for other reasons but an 
 easily searchable name would help. Dlang as the search term 
 isn't good enough because it's not actually the language's 
 name, people don't use it that much when referring to D, nor do 
 they usually use D2.


Nowdays searchability is an important factor, today if can't be 
found easily with Google you barely exist. Language names like 
Clojure are very good because they are meaningful, and being a 
typo (instead of "closure") they are uncommon and easy to find.

I think in origin D used to be called "Mars" that is probably a 
bit better for googling. But it was changed to "D" probably to 

names and to make them feel at home :o)

Now I think it's too much late to change the language name again.

To solve the searchability problem the Go language has introduced 
the convention of using "golang" as search term. In theory D is 
able to use the same strategy with the "dlang" word, but so far 
the official way to search for D is to use "D language" or "D 
programming language".

Bye,
bearophile
Mar 15 2012
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> writes:
On 3/15/12 8:23 PM, ixid wrote:

 D is a very poor name for a language. I appreciate it's late in the day
 for this and that it has probably been discussed before (not that I
 could find such a discussion with Google which relates to my point).


Renaming D at this point would kill it.

Andrei
Mar 15 2012
parent reply "ixid" <nuaccount gmail.com> writes:
Do you think a minor renaming like using Dlang as the name 
consistently would be damaging?
Mar 15 2012
next sibling parent reply Kevin <kevincox.ca gmail.com> writes:
On 03/15/2012 10:17 PM, ixid wrote:

 Do you think a minor renaming like using Dlang as the name 
 consistently would be damaging?


Yes,

Call it D.  But use Dlang whenever you talk/write about it.  And Dlang 
sounds silly.  Go is still Go even though they site Golang whenever it 
is mentioned.
Mar 15 2012
parent "Nick Sabalausky" <a a.a> writes:
"Kevin" <kevincox.ca gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:mailman.741.1331864735.4860.digitalmars-d puremagic.com...

 Go is still Go even though they site Golang whenever it is mentioned.


I like to call it "Issue 9"
Mar 15 2012
prev sibling next sibling parent "Bernard Helyer" <b.helyer gmail.com> writes:
On Friday, 16 March 2012 at 02:17:13 UTC, ixid wrote:

 Do you think a minor renaming like using Dlang as the name 
 consistently would be damaging?


Yes. Changing it now is an incredibly stupid idea.
Mar 15 2012
prev sibling next sibling parent Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> writes:
On 3/15/12 9:17 PM, ixid wrote:

 Do you think a minor renaming like using Dlang as the name consistently
 would be damaging?


Not damaging. Deadly.

Andrei
Mar 15 2012
prev sibling parent reply =?UTF-8?B?QWxleCBSw7hubmUgUGV0ZXJzZW4=?= <xtzgzorex gmail.com> writes:
On 16-03-2012 03:17, ixid wrote:

 Do you think a minor renaming like using Dlang as the name consistently
 would be damaging?


Like Andrei said, deadly, but it also sounds... really bad. Just 
pronounce it: "Dee-lang"

-- 
- Alex
Mar 15 2012
parent reply Andrej Mitrovic <andrej.mitrovich gmail.com> writes:
 On 16-03-2012 03:17, ixid wrote:
 Do you think a minor renaming like using Dlang as the name consistently
 would be damaging?


But what about all those people who have D tattooed on their necks?
D is awesome. Deeeee.

In fact, I wish dmd itself was named just 'd'. Combine that with its
fast compile times and it would make it really feel like an
interpreter! :P
Mar 15 2012
parent "Steven Schveighoffer" <schveiguy yahoo.com> writes:
On Thu, 15 Mar 2012 22:42:15 -0400, Andrej Mitrovic  
<andrej.mitrovich gmail.com> wrote:


 On 16-03-2012 03:17, ixid wrote:
 Do you think a minor renaming like using Dlang as the name consistently
 would be damaging?


 But what about all those people who have D tattooed on their necks?
 D is awesome. Deeeee.


Just add lang.  Problem solved.

On to more serious threads...

-Steve
Mar 16 2012
prev sibling next sibling parent Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> writes:
On 3/15/2012 6:23 PM, ixid wrote:

 D is a very poor name for a language. I appreciate it's late in the day for
this
 and that it has probably been discussed before (not that I could find such a
 discussion with Google which relates to my point). Although the results for D
 are fine when googling for things like "D tutorial", more obscure terms are
hard
 to find because "d" is so commonly used as a variable name. Searchability is
 important though I understand that this might be seen as a trivial point, it is
 a major human factor. The language would be far better off with a 3 to 5 letter
 identifier. It will succeed or fail for other reasons but an easily searchable
 name would help. Dlang as the search term isn't good enough because it's not
 actually the language's name, people don't use it that much when referring to
D,
 nor do they usually use D2.


Searching for "d programming" or "d programming language" works very well.
Mar 15 2012
prev sibling next sibling parent "Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator gmail.com> writes:
On Friday, 16 March 2012 at 01:23:29 UTC, ixid wrote:

 D is a very poor name for a language.


"D Programming Language", the long name, is used
pretty frequently and is old; if you spell it out,
the search results should get a lot better.
Mar 15 2012
prev sibling next sibling parent reply "Brad Anderson" <eco gnuk.net> writes:
On Friday, 16 March 2012 at 01:23:29 UTC, ixid wrote:

 D is a very poor name for a language. I appreciate it's late in 
 the day for this and that it has probably been discussed before 
 (not that I could find such a discussion with Google which 
 relates to my point). Although the results for D are fine when 
 googling for things like "D tutorial", more obscure terms are 
 hard to find because "d" is so commonly used as a variable 
 name. Searchability is important though I understand that this 
 might be seen as a trivial point, it is a major human factor. 
 The language would be far better off with a 3 to 5 letter 
 identifier. It will succeed or fail for other reasons but an 
 easily searchable name would help. Dlang as the search term 
 isn't good enough because it's not actually the language's 
 name, people don't use it that much when referring to D, nor do 
 they usually use D2.


https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/d-programming-language.org/pull/100

Regards,
Brad Anderson
Mar 15 2012
next sibling parent reply "ixid" <nuaccount gmail.com> writes:
Well perhaps something useful will come out of the thread at 
least. I hope people were not angered by the question.
Mar 15 2012
next sibling parent "Brad Anderson" <eco gnuk.net> writes:
On Friday, 16 March 2012 at 02:46:25 UTC, ixid wrote:

 Well perhaps something useful will come out of the thread at 
 least. I hope people were not angered by the question.


They'll forgive you...in time. :P

Regards,
Brad Anderson
Mar 15 2012
prev sibling next sibling parent Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> writes:
On 3/15/12 9:46 PM, ixid wrote:

 Well perhaps something useful will come out of the thread at least. I
 hope people were not angered by the question.


Not at all.

I think a good thing do do would be to put a word of advice on dlang.org 
for people on how to google for D.


Andrei
Mar 15 2012
prev sibling parent Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> writes:
On 3/15/2012 7:46 PM, ixid wrote:

 I hope people were not angered by the question.


Not in the least. It's a common question, and belongs in the FAQ.
Mar 16 2012
prev sibling parent Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> writes:
On 3/15/2012 7:43 PM, Brad Anderson wrote:

 https://github.com/D-Programming-Language/d-programming-language.org/pull/100


Right on :-)
Mar 16 2012
prev sibling parent reply Manu <turkeyman gmail.com> writes:
On 16 March 2012 03:23, ixid <nuaccount gmail.com> wrote:


 D is a very poor name for a language. I appreciate it's late in the day
 for this and that it has probably been discussed before (not that I could
 find such a discussion with Google which relates to my point). Although the
 results for D are fine when googling for things like "D tutorial", more
 obscure terms are hard to find because "d" is so commonly used as a
 variable name. Searchability is important though I understand that this
 might be seen as a trivial point, it is a major human factor. The language
 would be far better off with a 3 to 5 letter identifier. It will succeed or
 fail for other reasons but an easily searchable name would help. Dlang as
 the search term isn't good enough because it's not actually the language's
 name, people don't use it that much when referring to D, nor do they
 usually use D2.


Do you have trouble googling for C? I find that D related results are
currently only around 4-5 down the google results list, and it'll only get
higher as it get's more popular.
C searches are fine... I am often surprised just how much influence
programmers seem to have on search results placement.
Mar 16 2012
parent reply "Nick Sabalausky" <a a.a> writes:
"Manu" <turkeyman gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:mailman.778.1331920080.4860.digitalmars-d puremagic.com...

 On 16 March 2012 03:23, ixid <nuaccount gmail.com> wrote:


 D is a very poor name for a language. I appreciate it's late in the day
 for this and that it has probably been discussed before (not that I could
 find such a discussion with Google which relates to my point). Although 
 the
 results for D are fine when googling for things like "D tutorial", more
 obscure terms are hard to find because "d" is so commonly used as a
 variable name. Searchability is important though I understand that this
 might be seen as a trivial point, it is a major human factor. The 
 language
 would be far better off with a 3 to 5 letter identifier. It will succeed 
 or
 fail for other reasons but an easily searchable name would help. Dlang as
 the search term isn't good enough because it's not actually the 
 language's
 name, people don't use it that much when referring to D, nor do they
 usually use D2.


 Do you have trouble googling for C? I find that D related results are
 currently only around 4-5 down the google results list, and it'll only get
 higher as it get's more popular.
 C searches are fine... I am often surprised just how much influence
 programmers seem to have on search results placement.


Google search results are different for everybody. They tailor the search 
results they give you based on your past search (and clickthrough) history. 
If you're doing a lot of programmer searches, they're going to start giving 
you more programmer results.

That's one of many reasons I used to use Scroogle, and now that Scroogle's 
dead (RIP), IxQuick and StartPage.

See also "Filter bubble": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filter_bubble
Mar 16 2012
next sibling parent Manu <turkeyman gmail.com> writes:
On 16 March 2012 23:29, Nick Sabalausky <a a.a> wrote:


 "Manu" <turkeyman gmail.com> wrote in message
 news:mailman.778.1331920080.4860.digitalmars-d puremagic.com...

 On 16 March 2012 03:23, ixid <nuaccount gmail.com> wrote:


 D is a very poor name for a language. I appreciate it's late in the day
 for this and that it has probably been discussed before (not that I




 could

 find such a discussion with Google which relates to my point). Although
 the
 results for D are fine when googling for things like "D tutorial", more
 obscure terms are hard to find because "d" is so commonly used as a
 variable name. Searchability is important though I understand that this
 might be seen as a trivial point, it is a major human factor. The
 language
 would be far better off with a 3 to 5 letter identifier. It will succeed
 or
 fail for other reasons but an easily searchable name would help. Dlang




 as

 the search term isn't good enough because it's not actually the
 language's
 name, people don't use it that much when referring to D, nor do they
 usually use D2.


 Do you have trouble googling for C? I find that D related results are
 currently only around 4-5 down the google results list, and it'll only


 get

 higher as it get's more popular.
 C searches are fine... I am often surprised just how much influence
 programmers seem to have on search results placement.


 Google search results are different for everybody. They tailor the search
 results they give you based on your past search (and clickthrough) history.
 If you're doing a lot of programmer searches, they're going to start giving
 you more programmer results.


Perfect! So no problem then! Use D for a couple of months, and your search
results will sort themselves out :)
Mar 16 2012
prev sibling parent Chris Dahl <chris dahlweb.net> writes:
A while back I put this search page together.  I killed the old
domain, but have set the site up on a new domain.  In short, it is a
custom Google search of D related web sites.  The list of sites is
old, so if I need to add some, just let me know.  I would prefer to
base urls that are strictly D related to keep the results 'pure'.

http://crdahl.com/d/

--Chris

On Fri, Mar 16, 2012 at 4:48 PM, Manu <turkeyman gmail.com> wrote:

 On 16 March 2012 23:29, Nick Sabalausky <a a.a> wrote:

 "Manu" <turkeyman gmail.com> wrote in message
 news:mailman.778.1331920080.4860.digitalmars-d puremagic.com...

 On 16 March 2012 03:23, ixid <nuaccount gmail.com> wrote:


 D is a very poor name for a language. I appreciate it's late in the day
 for this and that it has probably been discussed before (not that I
 could
 find such a discussion with Google which relates to my point). Although
 the
 results for D are fine when googling for things like "D tutorial", more
 obscure terms are hard to find because "d" is so commonly used as a
 variable name. Searchability is important though I understand that this
 might be seen as a trivial point, it is a major human factor. The
 language
 would be far better off with a 3 to 5 letter identifier. It will
 succeed
 or
 fail for other reasons but an easily searchable name would help. Dlang
 as
 the search term isn't good enough because it's not actually the
 language's
 name, people don't use it that much when referring to D, nor do they
 usually use D2.


 Do you have trouble googling for C? I find that D related results are
 currently only around 4-5 down the google results list, and it'll only
 get
 higher as it get's more popular.
 C searches are fine... I am often surprised just how much influence
 programmers seem to have on search results placement.


 Google search results are different for everybody. They tailor the search
 results they give you based on your past search (and clickthrough)
 history.
 If you're doing a lot of programmer searches, they're going to start
 giving
 you more programmer results.



 Perfect! So no problem then! Use D for a couple of months, and your search
 results will sort themselves out :)
Mar 20 2012