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