www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D - D ranked as #25 by IEEE spectrum

reply Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQ=?= writes:
http://spectrum.ieee.org/static/interactive-the-top-programming-languages-2015
Sep 23 2015
next sibling parent reply Meta <jared771 gmail.com> writes:
On Wednesday, 23 September 2015 at 19:28:00 UTC, Ola Fosheim 
Grøstad wrote:
 http://spectrum.ieee.org/static/interactive-the-top-programming-languages-2015
They list D as useful for web development and embedded, but not desktop apps... And they list Rust was useful for desktop apps and web development. Something's fishy here.
Sep 23 2015
next sibling parent Laeeth Isharc <spamnolaeeth nospamlaeeth.com> writes:
On Wednesday, 23 September 2015 at 22:20:35 UTC, Meta wrote:
 On Wednesday, 23 September 2015 at 19:28:00 UTC, Ola Fosheim 
 Grøstad wrote:
 http://spectrum.ieee.org/static/interactive-the-top-programming-languages-2015
They list D as useful for web development and embedded, but not desktop apps... And they list Rust was useful for desktop apps and web development. Something's fishy here.
And D on mobile!
Sep 23 2015
prev sibling next sibling parent Jack Stouffer <jack jackstouffer.com> writes:
On Wednesday, 23 September 2015 at 22:20:35 UTC, Meta wrote:
 On Wednesday, 23 September 2015 at 19:28:00 UTC, Ola Fosheim 
 Grøstad wrote:
 http://spectrum.ieee.org/static/interactive-the-top-programming-languages-2015
They list D as useful for web development and embedded, but not desktop apps... And they list Rust was useful for desktop apps and web development. Something's fishy here.
And they list D as having more jobs than Lua. I wouldn't be exaggerating when I say it's probably 10x easier to get a job with Lua than D.
Sep 23 2015
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Idan Arye <GenericNPC gmail.com> writes:
On Wednesday, 23 September 2015 at 22:20:35 UTC, Meta wrote:
 On Wednesday, 23 September 2015 at 19:28:00 UTC, Ola Fosheim 
 Grøstad wrote:
 http://spectrum.ieee.org/static/interactive-the-top-programming-languages-2015
They list D as useful for web development and embedded, but not desktop apps... And they list Rust was useful for desktop apps and web development. Something's fishy here.
They list TCL for embedded. This is behind ridiculous...
Sep 23 2015
next sibling parent reply Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQ=?= writes:
On Thursday, 24 September 2015 at 00:16:27 UTC, Idan Arye wrote:
 On Wednesday, 23 September 2015 at 22:20:35 UTC, Meta wrote:
 On Wednesday, 23 September 2015 at 19:28:00 UTC, Ola Fosheim 
 Grøstad wrote:
 http://spectrum.ieee.org/static/interactive-the-top-programming-languages-2015
They list D as useful for web development and embedded, but not desktop apps... And they list Rust was useful for desktop apps and web development. Something's fishy here.
They list TCL for embedded. This is behind ridiculous...
http://wiki.tcl.tk/1363 http://jim.tcl.tk/index.html/doc/www/www/index.html
Sep 23 2015
parent Idan Arye <GenericNPC gmail.com> writes:
On Thursday, 24 September 2015 at 01:32:54 UTC, Ola Fosheim 
Grøstad wrote:
 On Thursday, 24 September 2015 at 00:16:27 UTC, Idan Arye wrote:
 On Wednesday, 23 September 2015 at 22:20:35 UTC, Meta wrote:
 On Wednesday, 23 September 2015 at 19:28:00 UTC, Ola Fosheim 
 Grøstad wrote:
 http://spectrum.ieee.org/static/interactive-the-top-programming-languages-2015
They list D as useful for web development and embedded, but not desktop apps... And they list Rust was useful for desktop apps and web development. Something's fishy here.
They list TCL for embedded. This is behind ridiculous...
http://wiki.tcl.tk/1363 http://jim.tcl.tk/index.html/doc/www/www/index.html
Mother of... Is it still stringly typed?
Sep 24 2015
prev sibling parent Henry Gouk <henry.gouk gmail.com> writes:
On Thursday, 24 September 2015 at 00:16:27 UTC, Idan Arye wrote:
 On Wednesday, 23 September 2015 at 22:20:35 UTC, Meta wrote:
 On Wednesday, 23 September 2015 at 19:28:00 UTC, Ola Fosheim 
 Grøstad wrote:
 http://spectrum.ieee.org/static/interactive-the-top-programming-languages-2015
They list D as useful for web development and embedded, but not desktop apps... And they list Rust was useful for desktop apps and web development. Something's fishy here.
They list TCL for embedded. This is behind ridiculous...
A lot of EDA tools use TCL as a scripting language for automating tasks. It's not quite embedded programming, but it is related.
Sep 23 2015
prev sibling next sibling parent Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQ=?= writes:
On Wednesday, 23 September 2015 at 22:20:35 UTC, Meta wrote:
 On Wednesday, 23 September 2015 at 19:28:00 UTC, Ola Fosheim 
 Grøstad wrote:
 http://spectrum.ieee.org/static/interactive-the-top-programming-languages-2015
They list D as useful for web development and embedded, but not desktop apps... And they list Rust was useful for desktop apps and web development. Something's fishy here.
I think they spent most time on the top 10 when it comes to qualitative assessment, the rest is done using quantitative aggregation. If you click on "Open" you see the ranking on open source networks (like Github). Here D sadly falls down to 32, wheras Rust is getting a much better rank. Which is probably right, open source networks do to some extent show trends.
Sep 23 2015
prev sibling parent reply Kapps <opantm2+spam gmail.com> writes:
On Wednesday, 23 September 2015 at 22:20:35 UTC, Meta wrote:
 On Wednesday, 23 September 2015 at 19:28:00 UTC, Ola Fosheim 
 Grøstad wrote:
 http://spectrum.ieee.org/static/interactive-the-top-programming-languages-2015
They list D as useful for web development and embedded, but not desktop apps... And they list Rust was useful for desktop apps and web development. Something's fishy here.
I don't really disagree about D not being so useful for desktop apps, thanks to the GUI situation. There's no up-to-date Qt bindings (excluding a Qml loader), GTK-D exists but GTK had some serious issues when I last tried it (especially on Mac), and I really do not like the look and feel of Swing. There are some other libraries, but most I've looked at are not cross-platform (Windows, Mac, Linux), or are not maintained. I am intending to try my luck at creating something similar to Xamarin Forms with Qt being the initial backend, but we'll see how that goes. Besides the GUI situation, D would of course be nice for desktop apps. Until then, not so much.
Sep 24 2015
next sibling parent suliman <Evermind live.ru> writes:
I am intending to try my luck at creating
 something similar to Xamarin Forms with Qt being the initial 
 backend, but we'll see how that goes. Besides the GUI 
 situation, D would of course be nice for desktop apps.
Could you handle of any present GUI lib, or binding for example dgui or dfl? DOtherside are look like very promissing, at last for now when there is no any native qml-based GUI
Sep 24 2015
prev sibling parent reply Kagamin <spam here.lot> writes:
On Friday, 25 September 2015 at 04:18:44 UTC, Kapps wrote:
 On Wednesday, 23 September 2015 at 22:20:35 UTC, Meta wrote:
 On Wednesday, 23 September 2015 at 19:28:00 UTC, Ola Fosheim 
 Grøstad wrote:
 http://spectrum.ieee.org/static/interactive-the-top-programming-languages-2015
They list D as useful for web development and embedded, but not desktop apps... And they list Rust was useful for desktop apps and web development. Something's fishy here.
I don't really disagree about D not being so useful for desktop apps, thanks to the GUI situation.
Does C fare better here (listed for desktop development)?
Sep 25 2015
parent reply Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisProg gmx.com> writes:
On Friday, 25 September 2015 at 08:45:08 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
 On Friday, 25 September 2015 at 04:18:44 UTC, Kapps wrote:
 On Wednesday, 23 September 2015 at 22:20:35 UTC, Meta wrote:
 On Wednesday, 23 September 2015 at 19:28:00 UTC, Ola Fosheim 
 Grøstad wrote:
 http://spectrum.ieee.org/static/interactive-the-top-programming-languages-2015
They list D as useful for web development and embedded, but not desktop apps... And they list Rust was useful for desktop apps and web development. Something's fishy here.
I don't really disagree about D not being so useful for desktop apps, thanks to the GUI situation.
Does C fare better here (listed for desktop development)?
Well, gnome is written entirely in C AFAIK, so it's definitely possible to write full-scale desktop applications in C without C++. But off the top of my head, I don't know of any C GUI toolkits other than GTK. All the rest are C++. And honestly, I don't understand why anyone would write large applications in C instead of C++, but there are definitely folks that prefer to do that. So, I'd say that C fares better than D in that GTK is written for it, whereas D has to have bindings to it (though that should be pretty straightforward, if tedious, and gtkd does exist), so C is a bit ahead but not necessarily by bunch. C++ obviously does _far_ better at this point. But it's a _huge_ undertaking to even write usable bindings to a C++ GUI library, let alone write your own GUI toolkit in D (which would be truly fantastic but is pretty unrealistic at this point for anything non-trivial). And the projects which have tried to write bindings/wrappers for C++ GUI toolkits have generally not had enough folks working on them to actually succeed. I'm sure that we'll get there at some point, but it takes a lot of manpower, and that's something that we tend to be lacking. From what I've heard, I'd guess that DWT was the most mature way to write a GUI in D, but I've never used it, and I'm not a huge fan of the idea of using a Java-centric library or framework, and SWT uses GTK for its backend on Linux, and I hate the look of GTK. So, I wouldn't be in a big hurry to use DWT, but I'd strongly suggest that anyone seriously looking at writing a GUI application in D take a look at it. If I were going to write a full-scale GUI app in D, I'd probably either use DWT or write the GUI portion in C++ with Qt and use D for the backend. But hopefully by the time I get around to writing any GUIs with D, the situation will have improved. There are definitely folks who _want_ the situation to improve, but we need enough folks working on solutions in a coordinated manner to actually succeed. And I get the impression that most D libraries thus far which have gone anywhere have been written by individual developers, which is unlikely to work for a GUI toolkit. For instance, Aurora was a great project idea (though not a GUI toolkit per se), and it seems to have pretty much died, because Adam failed to get much of anyone else to help him with it. Similarly, as I understand it, QtD died, because there weren't a lot of developers working on it, and those that were got tired of it. - Jonathan M Davis
Sep 25 2015
next sibling parent Kagamin <spam here.lot> writes:
On Friday, 25 September 2015 at 09:17:46 UTC, Jonathan M Davis 
wrote:
 So, I'd say that C fares better than D in that GTK is written 
 for it, whereas D has to have bindings to it (though that 
 should be pretty straightforward, if tedious, and gtkd does 
 exist), so C is a bit ahead but not necessarily by bunch.
Well, the point was that because GTK sucks, it doesn't make D for desktop development. That's why the question if C is better.
Sep 25 2015
prev sibling next sibling parent jmh530 <john.michael.hall gmail.com> writes:
On Friday, 25 September 2015 at 09:17:46 UTC, Jonathan M Davis 
wrote:
 Well, gnome is written entirely in C AFAIK, so it's definitely 
 possible to write full-scale desktop applications in C without 
 C++. But off the top of my head, I don't know of any C GUI 
 toolkits other than GTK.
They also make heavy use of the GObject library. A few years ago they created the Vala language, which combines the two and compiles back to C.
Sep 25 2015
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQ=?= writes:
On Friday, 25 September 2015 at 09:17:46 UTC, Jonathan M Davis 
wrote:
 and use D for the backend. But hopefully by the time I get 
 around to writing any GUIs with D, the situation will have 
 improved.
The most obvious solution is to use one of the chromium/V8 based frameworks for the GUI and use the AOT compiled language for the application engine. A well tuned GUI needs development with fast iterations, so a JIT + REPL is your best bet. + probably easier to find UI designers that master javascript et al. Thanks to ArrayBuffer you should be able to transfer an array of structs from C/D to javascript with no overhead.
Sep 25 2015
parent Cauterite <cauterite gmail.com> writes:
On Friday, 25 September 2015 at 15:11:59 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad 
wrote:
 The most obvious solution is to use one of the chromium/V8 
 based frameworks for the GUI and use the AOT compiled language 
 for the application engine.
This actually works surprisingly well — I'm currently working on a replacement shell for Windows which has a D backend and an SpiderMonkey/XUL frontend (Firefox's xul.dll), communicating via JSON over a websocket (using the 'libwebsockets' C library on the backend).
Sep 25 2015
prev sibling next sibling parent Mike James <foo bar.com> writes:
On Friday, 25 September 2015 at 09:17:46 UTC, Jonathan M Davis 
wrote:
 On Friday, 25 September 2015 at 08:45:08 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
 [...]
Well, gnome is written entirely in C AFAIK, so it's definitely possible to write full-scale desktop applications in C without C++. But off the top of my head, I don't know of any C GUI toolkits other than GTK. All the rest are C++. And honestly, I don't understand why anyone would write large applications in C instead of C++, but there are definitely folks that prefer to do that. [...]
IUP is written in C... Regards, -<Mike>-
Sep 25 2015
prev sibling parent deadalnix <deadalnix gmail.com> writes:
On Friday, 25 September 2015 at 09:17:46 UTC, Jonathan M Davis 
wrote:
 On Friday, 25 September 2015 at 08:45:08 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
 On Friday, 25 September 2015 at 04:18:44 UTC, Kapps wrote:
 On Wednesday, 23 September 2015 at 22:20:35 UTC, Meta wrote:
 On Wednesday, 23 September 2015 at 19:28:00 UTC, Ola Fosheim 
 Grøstad wrote:
 http://spectrum.ieee.org/static/interactive-the-top-programming-languages-2015
They list D as useful for web development and embedded, but not desktop apps... And they list Rust was useful for desktop apps and web development. Something's fishy here.
I don't really disagree about D not being so useful for desktop apps, thanks to the GUI situation.
Does C fare better here (listed for desktop development)?
Well, gnome is written entirely in C AFAIK, so it's definitely possible to write full-scale desktop applications in C without C++. But off the top of my head, I don't know of any C GUI toolkits other than GTK. All the rest are C++. And honestly, I don't understand why anyone would write large applications in C instead of C++, but there are definitely folks that prefer to do that.
It turns out I worked on gnome. It is indeed mostly in C. It is also a very good example of horribly screwed up codebase. Most of it simply doesn't compile on a regular basis to the point that getting a build of gnome is near impossible. Updating anything is breakign radom shit all over the place and the code is incredibly fragile. Some components are broken for years, everybody knows it, there are even mock up to replace them, but it is near impossible to make it happen. See for example: https://wiki.gnome.org/Design/OS/Tabs Long story short, Gnome is really not the project you want to imitate in any ways.
Sep 25 2015
prev sibling parent reply Kagamin <spam here.lot> writes:
D ranges from web to embedded with nothing in-between, lol.
Sep 24 2015
parent Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQ=?= writes:
On Thursday, 24 September 2015 at 15:35:28 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
 D ranges from web to embedded with nothing in-between, lol.
WebAssembly ;)
Sep 24 2015