www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D - Opinions on DConf talks

reply "Joakim" <joakim airpost.net> writes:
Now that the last talk from DConf is up, I thought it might be a 
good time to review them, as someone who didn't attend.

 From the standpoint of a D conference, the worst talk was 
Walter's.  It was clearly aimed at a non-D audience, so there was 
nothing new there for a D audience: I'm guessing it's a familiar 
talk he gives to outside groups.  However, as a recording on the 
internet, it might be the best talk for newbies, as an 
introduction to the language, as every other talk goes deeper 
into the language.

I wish Walter had done a real technical talk on his experiences 
developing D and dmd, as he is a font of knowledge on many 
technical topics, rather than a basic overview of D.  Maybe next 
year, perhaps he can talk about porting dmd to D. :)

The rest of the first day's talks were interesting looks at 
various technical issues.  Ben loves testing a bit too much, ;) I 
suspect that a distributed approach like Robert's is the future.  
Didn't realize there was so much to copying and moving till I 
watched Ali's talk, still not sure I grasp all of it.  Good to 
see a different approach to GC by Leandro.

I was underwhelmed by Manu's talk: too much low-level technical 
detail about the integration effort between C++ and D, not enough 
discussion of the benefits of using D.  The Q&A panel with Walter 
and Andrei should have been an hour, or until questions petered 
out, and held every day of DConf. :)

Vladimir's talk was the highlight of the second day for me, a 
great mix of technical material and exploring the current state 
of related D libraries.  Adam's talk was enjoyable, a nice look 

started watching but haven't finished Martin and Maxime's talks 
yet, not that interested in shared libraries or JITs but I'll 
finish them later.

Don's talk was the best of the conference: great mix of technical 
material, pragmatic considerations, and humor.  The title was 
horrible though, wasn't expecting much from a talk on 
"metaprogramming," was pleasantly surprised when the topic was 
barely talked about.  Nice overview of SIMD by Manu and LLVM/LDC 
by Nadlinger.  Simcha's talk was well done but I wonder if I'd 
ever use any of those higher-level patterns; good to hear what 
Stefane's team is up to with static analysis.

Andrei, as usual, was very good, though there was too much 
structure and boilerplate for me, however little there was 
compared to his usual talk.  The bits about scaling to a million 
users through "professionalism" were weird for a volunteer effort 
though.

All in all, a great effort, looking forward to the next one.
Jun 25 2013
next sibling parent David Gileadi <gileadis NSPMgmail.com> writes:
This may be OT since I'm not offering opinions on individual talks, but 
I really enjoyed the talks and want to say thanks for posting them 
online for us non-attendees to enjoy.  I know Andrei was using them as 
an analogy, but his comments about the professionalism of the AV crew 
were spot on--they did a fantastic job.

Great conference!
Jun 25 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Regan Heath" <regan netmail.co.nz> writes:
On Tue, 25 Jun 2013 16:18:44 +0100, Joakim <joakim airpost.net> wrote:


 Now that the last talk from DConf is up, I thought it might be a good  
 time to review them, as someone who didn't attend.


I don't have anything specific to say about any of the talks in particular  
(constructive or otherwise).  I enjoyed them all to varying degrees (based  
mainly on how applicable they were to me personally :P).

I respect the time, effort and courage it takes to do a talk - especially  
one which is subsequently shared online with a wider community - so I  
wanted to say a big THANK YOU to everyone involved.

Regan

-- 
Using Opera's revolutionary email client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
Jun 25 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw ubuntu.com> writes:
On 25 June 2013 16:18, Joakim <joakim airpost.net> wrote:

 Now that the last talk from DConf is up, I thought it might be a good time
 to review them, as someone who didn't attend.

 From the standpoint of a D conference, the worst talk was Walter's.  It was
 clearly aimed at a non-D audience, so there was nothing new there for a D
 audience: I'm guessing it's a familiar talk he gives to outside groups.
 However, as a recording on the internet, it might be the best talk for
 newbies, as an introduction to the language, as every other talk goes deeper
 into the language.

 I wish Walter had done a real technical talk on his experiences developing D
 and dmd, as he is a font of knowledge on many technical topics, rather than
 a basic overview of D.  Maybe next year, perhaps he can talk about porting
 dmd to D. :)


Actually, when having coffee between myself, Brad, Walter and Manu
before the conference.  I'm pretty certain he mentioned feeling a bit
odd that he was going to do largely a non-technical talk.  And to be
honest, a keynote speech should be kept non-technical.  :)


--
Iain Buclaw

*(p < e ? p++ : p) = (c & 0x0f) + '0';
Jun 25 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent reply "MattCoder" <mattcoder hotmail.com> writes:
On Tuesday, 25 June 2013 at 15:18:46 UTC, Joakim wrote:

 .
 .
 .
 All in all, a great effort, looking forward to the next one.


I watched and liked 'em all.

But one little thing that comes in mind now is: It really needs 
this type of conference when we live in Internet era?

It was a U$ 30k event for how many attendees? 100 for a universe 
of 10k D users?

What I mean is, can't "we" make those videos and share thoughts 
without conferences, do it monthly to gather attention of more 
programmers?

If the internet works for open source code, a live meeting over 
internet wouldn't be possible too?




PS: Sorry my poor english.
Jun 25 2013
next sibling parent reply "Adam Wilson" <flyboynw gmail.com> writes:
On Tue, 25 Jun 2013 12:38:01 -0700, MattCoder <mattcoder hotmail.com>  
wrote:


 On Tuesday, 25 June 2013 at 15:18:46 UTC, Joakim wrote:

 .
 .
 .
 All in all, a great effort, looking forward to the next one.


 I watched and liked 'em all.

 But one little thing that comes in mind now is: It really needs this  
 type of conference when we live in Internet era?

 It was a U$ 30k event for how many attendees? 100 for a universe of 10k  
 D users?

 What I mean is, can't "we" make those videos and share thoughts without  
 conferences, do it monthly to gather attention of more programmers?

 If the internet works for open source code, a live meeting over internet  
 wouldn't be possible too?




 PS: Sorry my poor english.


I think in this internet era it is far to easy to underestimate the power  
of physical interaction. More got done as a result of the conference than  
I think would've been possible otherwise. Sometimes you just need to duke  
it out verbally. :-)

-- 
Adam Wilson
IRC: LightBender
Project Coordinator
The Horizon Project
http://www.thehorizonproject.org/
Jun 25 2013
next sibling parent "MattCoder" <mattcoder hotmail.com> writes:
On Tuesday, 25 June 2013 at 19:42:45 UTC, Adam Wilson wrote:

 I think in this internet era it is far to easy to underestimate 
 the power of physical interaction. More got done as a result of 
 the conference than I think would've been possible otherwise. 
 Sometimes you just need to duke it out verbally. :-)



I understand your point, and In fact I think this was (or will 
be) valuable for D community. But at the same time it's too 
restrictive, and there is distance and others costs etc.

I just think a live meeting maybe would be a nice try.
Jun 25 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent reply "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> writes:
On Tue, Jun 25, 2013 at 12:42:44PM -0700, Adam Wilson wrote:

 On Tue, 25 Jun 2013 12:38:01 -0700, MattCoder
 <mattcoder hotmail.com> wrote:


[...]

I watched and liked 'em all.

But one little thing that comes in mind now is: It really needs
this type of conference when we live in Internet era?

It was a U$ 30k event for how many attendees? 100 for a universe
of 10k D users?

What I mean is, can't "we" make those videos and share thoughts
without conferences, do it monthly to gather attention of more
programmers?

If the internet works for open source code, a live meeting over
internet wouldn't be possible too?

PS: Sorry my poor english.


 
 I think in this internet era it is far to easy to underestimate the
 power of physical interaction. More got done as a result of the
 conference than I think would've been possible otherwise. Sometimes
 you just need to duke it out verbally. :-)


[...]

I couldn't make it to the conference, but from what I heard, a lot of
hatchets were buried and a lot of issues were sorted out as a result of
meeting in person. That should never be underestimated. :) In this day
and age of online personae, it's all too easy to forget that there are
real, living, breathing people behind the personae. Meeting in person
has a way of sorting things out in a way no amount of email, forum, or
online chat could ever do.


T

-- 
Knowledge is that area of ignorance that we arrange and classify. -- Ambrose
Bierce
Jun 25 2013
parent Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> writes:
On 6/25/2013 12:58 PM, H. S. Teoh wrote:

 I couldn't make it to the conference, but from what I heard, a lot of
 hatchets were buried and a lot of issues were sorted out as a result of
 meeting in person. That should never be underestimated. :) In this day
 and age of online personae, it's all too easy to forget that there are
 real, living, breathing people behind the personae. Meeting in person
 has a way of sorting things out in a way no amount of email, forum, or
 online chat could ever do.


+1

The conference was immensely valuable.

The presentations themselves are just the sparks. The real stuff happens in 
discussions before and after.

It's like something a friend of mine told me. He realized after a few years
that 
the real business of the company he worked for happened at lunch, and that by 
bringing his own and eating it at his desk he wound up sabotaging his career.

BTW, personally I'm a lot more free with my thoughts & opinions when I'm not 
being recorded for posterity and data mining, as happens with all online 
interactions. There's a lot to be said for meeting people off the record to get 
those sausages made :-)
Jun 25 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent reply "Jonathan M Davis" <jmdavisProg gmx.com> writes:
On Tuesday, June 25, 2013 12:58:22 H. S. Teoh wrote:

 I couldn't make it to the conference, but from what I heard, a lot of
 hatchets were buried and a lot of issues were sorted out as a result of
 meeting in person. That should never be underestimated. :) In this day
 and age of online personae, it's all too easy to forget that there are
 real, living, breathing people behind the personae. Meeting in person
 has a way of sorting things out in a way no amount of email, forum, or
 online chat could ever do.


I was very surprised by how many valuable discussions and interactions took 
place outside of the talks. I don't think that that value can be 
overestimated. For instance, I suspect that almost all of us view Manu 
somewhat differently from having interacted with him in person. He's still 
somewhat abrasive in person but nothing like he is online. You get a very 
different view of someone from interacting with them in person, and I found 
that many discussions were far more effective when we had the opportunity to 
discuss stuff in person informally rather than in the newsgroup (as valuable as 
discussions here can be).

And for those that couldn't actually make to the conference, they've been able 
to view the recordings of the talks. I don't see how we lose anything by 
having conferences like this. They're incredibly common, and I think that 
we'll benefit immensely from having them yearly like Walter and Andrei have 
said is the plan is from now on.

- Jonathan M Davis
Jun 25 2013
parent reply "Adam D. Ruppe" <destructionator gmail.com> writes:
On Tuesday, 25 June 2013 at 22:16:31 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:

 I don't see how we lose anything by having conferences like 
 this.


There is possibly an opportunity cost: I'd be willing to work 
significant time on D stuff, directed by the community, for a 
year if paid the $30,000 we raised on kickstarter, and perhaps 
even use spaces instead of tabs in the code [!!!] and I'm sure 
I'm not the only one.

But the conference(s) may end up being worth more than 
contracting some programmers, so it isn't necessarily a loss.
Jun 25 2013
parent Brad Roberts <braddr puremagic.com> writes:
On 6/25/13 4:36 PM, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:

 On Tuesday, 25 June 2013 at 22:16:31 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:

 I don't see how we lose anything by having conferences like this.


 There is possibly an opportunity cost: I'd be willing to work significant time
on D stuff, directed
 by the community, for a year if paid the $30,000 we raised on kickstarter, and
perhaps even use
 spaces instead of tabs in the code [!!!] and I'm sure I'm not the only one.

 But the conference(s) may end up being worth more than contracting some
programmers, so it isn't
 necessarily a loss.


Spending $30k on a single developer vs spending it on a conference attended by
100 people where lots 
of major issues are discussed is no contest.  The conference every time.

If even a handful of people took something away from the conference and went
off and did something 
that improves the community even a little, the end result is worth a lot more. 
And I'm sure that 
more than a handful of people got great value out of time spent.
Jun 26 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Manu <turkeyman gmail.com> writes:
On 26 June 2013 08:16, Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisProg gmx.com> wrote:


 On Tuesday, June 25, 2013 12:58:22 H. S. Teoh wrote:

 I couldn't make it to the conference, but from what I heard, a lot of
 hatchets were buried and a lot of issues were sorted out as a result of
 meeting in person. That should never be underestimated. :) In this day
 and age of online personae, it's all too easy to forget that there are
 real, living, breathing people behind the personae. Meeting in person
 has a way of sorting things out in a way no amount of email, forum, or
 online chat could ever do.


 I was very surprised by how many valuable discussions and interactions took
 place outside of the talks. I don't think that that value can be
 overestimated. For instance, I suspect that almost all of us view Manu
 somewhat differently from having interacted with him in person. He's still
 somewhat abrasive in person but nothing like he is online. You get a very
 different view of someone from interacting with them in person, and I found
 that many discussions were far more effective when we had the opportunity
 to
 discuss stuff in person informally rather than in the newsgroup (as
 valuable as
 discussions here can be).


Brutal! ;)
Jun 25 2013
parent "Steven Schveighoffer" <schveiguy yahoo.com> writes:
On Tue, 25 Jun 2013 19:58:59 -0400, Manu <turkeyman gmail.com> wrote:


 Brutal! ;)


Wow, you're not as ugly as you type! :)

One thing that I would agree is that people are more civil, more  
accommodating in person. I too cannot put enough value on actually  
interacting with everyone instead of typing at them.  Personal interaction  
is a very important thing, we take so many cues from body language in how  
to interpret this ambiguous language (English, that is). We digital-age  
folks tend to forget that.

Not just in burying hatchets, but tearing down biases as well... I can  
think of a few people who are quite different in person than I was  
expecting. Will not name names though :)

-Steve
Jun 25 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "H. S. Teoh" <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> writes:
On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 09:58:59AM +1000, Manu wrote:

 On 26 June 2013 08:16, Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisProg gmx.com> wrote:


[...]

 I was very surprised by how many valuable discussions and
 interactions took place outside of the talks. I don't think that
 that value can be overestimated. For instance, I suspect that almost
 all of us view Manu somewhat differently from having interacted with
 him in person. He's still somewhat abrasive in person but nothing
 like he is online. You get a very different view of someone from
 interacting with them in person, and I found that many discussions
 were far more effective when we had the opportunity to discuss stuff
 in person informally rather than in the newsgroup (as valuable as
 discussions here can be).


 
 Brutal! ;)


Heh... I must say, watching Manu's talks gave the necessary context to
interpret his online writing style, which are actually *not* abrasive as
some might construe them to be. It's a case of "lost in transit": online
text is notoriously bad at conveying the author's emotions and tone of
voice (that is to say, not at all), so an offhand joke or casual remark
can be wrongly taken to be a personal attack when there is no such
intention on the part of the author. Getting to know a person (in person
:-P) makes a big difference in how you interpret what he writes.

That's why meeting in person makes a huge difference. :) Online video
chats (e.g. Skype) help somewhat, but I still feel that Skype is missing
something from actual in-person contact.


T

-- 
We've all heard that a million monkeys banging on a million typewriters
will eventually reproduce the entire works of Shakespeare.  Now, thanks
to the Internet, we know this is not true. -- Robert Wilensk
Jun 25 2013
prev sibling parent reply Manu <turkeyman gmail.com> writes:
On 26 June 2013 10:15, H. S. Teoh <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> wrote:


 On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 09:58:59AM +1000, Manu wrote:

 On 26 June 2013 08:16, Jonathan M Davis <jmdavisProg gmx.com> wrote:


 [...]

 I was very surprised by how many valuable discussions and
 interactions took place outside of the talks. I don't think that
 that value can be overestimated. For instance, I suspect that almost
 all of us view Manu somewhat differently from having interacted with
 him in person. He's still somewhat abrasive in person but nothing
 like he is online. You get a very different view of someone from
 interacting with them in person, and I found that many discussions
 were far more effective when we had the opportunity to discuss stuff
 in person informally rather than in the newsgroup (as valuable as
 discussions here can be).


 Brutal! ;)


 Heh... I must say, watching Manu's talks gave the necessary context to
 interpret his online writing style, which are actually *not* abrasive as
 some might construe them to be. It's a case of "lost in transit": online
 text is notoriously bad at conveying the author's emotions and tone of
 voice (that is to say, not at all), so an offhand joke or casual remark
 can be wrongly taken to be a personal attack when there is no such
 intention on the part of the author. Getting to know a person (in person
 :-P) makes a big difference in how you interpret what he writes.


Haha, well I'm glad to hear that!
I think it's safe to say that my generally blunt and perhaps somewhat
northern-australian inflammatory sense of humor just doesn't translate to
text.
I've also never involved myself in any online community before, and just
write basically how I talk. Believe it or not, I'm actually a friendly guy!
...or at least, I like to think so... ;)
Jun 25 2013
next sibling parent "Brad Anderson" <eco gnuk.net> writes:
On Wednesday, 26 June 2013 at 00:40:48 UTC, Manu wrote:

 On 26 June 2013 10:15, H. S. Teoh <hsteoh quickfur.ath.cx> 
 wrote:


 On Wed, Jun 26, 2013 at 09:58:59AM +1000, Manu wrote:

 On 26 June 2013 08:16, Jonathan M Davis 
 <jmdavisProg gmx.com> wrote:


 [...]

 I was very surprised by how many valuable discussions and
 interactions took place outside of the talks. I don't 
 think that
 that value can be overestimated. For instance, I suspect 
 that almost
 all of us view Manu somewhat differently from having 
 interacted with
 him in person. He's still somewhat abrasive in person but 
 nothing
 like he is online. You get a very different view of 
 someone from
 interacting with them in person, and I found that many 
 discussions
 were far more effective when we had the opportunity to 
 discuss stuff
 in person informally rather than in the newsgroup (as 
 valuable as
 discussions here can be).


 Brutal! ;)


 Heh... I must say, watching Manu's talks gave the necessary 
 context to
 interpret his online writing style, which are actually *not* 
 abrasive as
 some might construe them to be. It's a case of "lost in 
 transit": online
 text is notoriously bad at conveying the author's emotions and 
 tone of
 voice (that is to say, not at all), so an offhand joke or 
 casual remark
 can be wrongly taken to be a personal attack when there is no 
 such
 intention on the part of the author. Getting to know a person 
 (in person
 :-P) makes a big difference in how you interpret what he 
 writes.


 Haha, well I'm glad to hear that!
 I think it's safe to say that my generally blunt and perhaps 
 somewhat
 northern-australian inflammatory sense of humor just doesn't 
 translate to
 text.
 I've also never involved myself in any online community before, 
 and just
 write basically how I talk. Believe it or not, I'm actually a 
 friendly guy!
 ...or at least, I like to think so... ;)


Don't worry. Those of us in the #d IRC channel knew you were a 
friendly guy :P. This is why I'm surprised people are talking 
about you like you are aggressive or abrasive rather than just 
passionate about subjects you know a lot about.  Real time 
interaction, even through text, can do wonders for getting to 
know someone's tone.
Jun 25 2013
prev sibling parent reply Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> writes:
On 6/25/2013 5:40 PM, Manu wrote:

  Believe it or not, I'm actually a friendly guy! ...or at
 least, I like to think so... ;)


I can vouch that Manu is a friendly guy!
Jun 25 2013
parent reply "deadalnix" <deadalnix gmail.com> writes:
On Wednesday, 26 June 2013 at 01:38:26 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:

 On 6/25/2013 5:40 PM, Manu wrote:

 Believe it or not, I'm actually a friendly guy! ...or at
 least, I like to think so... ;)


 I can vouch that Manu is a friendly guy!


You may think so, but he is just an hypocrite :P
Jun 26 2013
next sibling parent reply Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> writes:
On 6/26/2013 2:46 AM, deadalnix wrote:

 You may think so, but he is just an hypocrite :P


That's out of line here.
Jun 26 2013
parent reply "deadalnix" <deadalnix gmail.com> writes:
On Wednesday, 26 June 2013 at 10:06:19 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:

 On 6/26/2013 2:46 AM, deadalnix wrote:

 You may think so, but he is just an hypocrite :P


 That's out of line here.


The smiley isn't there randomly. And frankly, I really like 
Manu's style, he is intellectually stimulating.
Jun 26 2013
parent =?UTF-8?B?QWxpIMOHZWhyZWxp?= <acehreli yahoo.com> writes:
On 06/26/2013 03:15 AM, deadalnix wrote:


 On Wednesday, 26 June 2013 at 10:06:19 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:

 On 6/26/2013 2:46 AM, deadalnix wrote:

 You may think so, but he is just an hypocrite :P


 That's out of line here.


 The smiley isn't there randomly.


I think Walter got you there. ;)

Ali
Jun 26 2013
prev sibling parent reply Iain Buclaw <ibuclaw ubuntu.com> writes:
On 26 June 2013 10:46, deadalnix <deadalnix gmail.com> wrote:

 On Wednesday, 26 June 2013 at 01:38:26 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:

 On 6/25/2013 5:40 PM, Manu wrote:

 Believe it or not, I'm actually a friendly guy! ...or at
 least, I like to think so... ;)



 I can vouch that Manu is a friendly guy!



 You may think so, but he is just an hypocrite :P


<grammar> "an hypocrite" ??? </nazi>


Manu's a lovable hippy, and I can vouch having shared a small hotel
room with him (though I have bias because I'm a technological hippy
also ;)


--
Iain Buclaw

*(p < e ? p++ : p) = (c & 0x0f) + '0';
Jun 26 2013
parent =?UTF-8?B?QWxpIMOHZWhyZWxp?= <acehreli yahoo.com> writes:
On 06/26/2013 03:37 AM, Iain Buclaw wrote:


 On 26 June 2013 10:46, deadalnix <deadalnix gmail.com> wrote:



 You may think so, but he is just an hypocrite :P


 <grammar> "an hypocrite" ??? </nazi>


The French are exempt from that rule . ;)

Ali
Jun 26 2013
prev sibling next sibling parent "Joakim" <joakim airpost.net> writes:
On Tuesday, 25 June 2013 at 19:38:04 UTC, MattCoder wrote:

 But one little thing that comes in mind now is: It really needs 
 this type of conference when we live in Internet era?

 It was a U$ 30k event for how many attendees? 100 for a 
 universe of 10k D users?

 What I mean is, can't "we" make those videos and share thoughts 
 without conferences, do it monthly to gather attention of more 
 programmers?

 If the internet works for open source code, a live meeting over 
 internet wouldn't be possible too?


I agree, a physical conference is positively anachronistic in 
this day and age.  So much of D is done online, no reason these 
talks couldn't be done that way too.  That said, the last D 
conference was in 2007: it does make sense to get together in 
person at least once every six years, ;) at least for those who 
go in for that sort of thing.
Jun 25 2013
prev sibling parent reply "Kagamin" <spam here.lot> writes:
On Tuesday, 25 June 2013 at 19:38:04 UTC, MattCoder wrote:

 But one little thing that comes in mind now is: It really needs 
 this type of conference when we live in Internet era?


I believe conferences privatize information. Dconf is not half 
bad, but there're much worse cases. Video is low-quality medium 
to deliver technical information, in some cases it's completely 
inaccessible. Well, if it's not supposed to share information, 
then ok, but usually it's persieved in a different way.
Jun 26 2013
parent reply Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> writes:
On 6/26/13 5:23 AM, Kagamin wrote:

 On Tuesday, 25 June 2013 at 19:38:04 UTC, MattCoder wrote:

 But one little thing that comes in mind now is: It really needs this
 type of conference when we live in Internet era?


 I believe conferences privatize information. Dconf is not half bad, but
 there're much worse cases. Video is low-quality medium to deliver
 technical information, in some cases it's completely inaccessible. Well,
 if it's not supposed to share information, then ok, but usually it's
 persieved in a different way.


This all seems very odd to me.

Andrei
Jun 26 2013
parent "deadalnix" <deadalnix gmail.com> writes:
On Wednesday, 26 June 2013 at 15:58:41 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu 
wrote:

 On 6/26/13 5:23 AM, Kagamin wrote:

 On Tuesday, 25 June 2013 at 19:38:04 UTC, MattCoder wrote:

 But one little thing that comes in mind now is: It really 
 needs this
 type of conference when we live in Internet era?


 I believe conferences privatize information. Dconf is not half 
 bad, but
 there're much worse cases. Video is low-quality medium to 
 deliver
 technical information, in some cases it's completely 
 inaccessible. Well,
 if it's not supposed to share information, then ok, but 
 usually it's
 persieved in a different way.


 This all seems very odd to me.

 Andrei


You've spent to much time running the confs. When you can't go, 
they are the most frustrating thing ever. So much information is 
exchanged and so many people are out of it.

I remember finding myself watching conferences live at completely 
crazy schedules due to timeshift.

I guess recording provide a fair balance. Especially since 
DConf's are very high quality.
Jun 26 2013
prev sibling parent reply Manu <turkeyman gmail.com> writes:
On 26 June 2013 01:18, Joakim <joakim airpost.net> wrote:


 I was underwhelmed by Manu's talk: too much low-level technical detail
 about the integration effort between C++ and D, not enough discussion of
 the benefits of using D.  The Q&A panel with Walter and Andrei should have
 been an hour, or until questions petered out, and held every day of DConf.
 :)


I'd like to add a few comments here, since I guess I didn't do so at the
conference.

I initially really wanted my talk to be as you say/hoped. But I started
down that path, and realised I didn't have anywhere near enough meat to
fill an hour.
The truth is, integration of D with our workflow took a lot longer than
we'd hoped, and in some ways it's a miracle we persisted...
We got caught up on endless stumbling blocks, but the whole time, we could
see the light at the end of the tunnel. Just one last hurdle... yay... oh,
no actually... just one last hurdle... [repeat].
The segment at the start of my talk wrangling compilers, runtime libraries,
IDE's, debuginfo... this actually took probably 80-90% of our time. I had a
lot more slides in there previously, but it felt like they were a bit of a
downer, and not that interesting, so I took them out and just summarised.

As a result, when I wrote the talk, there wasn't as much code written in D
as I'd originally hoped, or enough time spent by the average programmer
writing D code that I could draw strong conclusions of the type you'd have
liked to hear about.
In the end, I thought it was more valuable to discuss our hurdles, and
justify some of the design points, requirements, and reasons behind
language features I had pushed for.
I think what I wanted as the most important take-away from my talk, was to
generate discussions to make sure other companies approaching D cold, as we
did, don't need to go through the same painful lead-in process in the
future.
Additionally, the design of our framework, which is a fairly solid piece of
work, may be of interest to others looking to do similar things. It ended
up with a good block in the middle, which I admit, does appear to be the
focus since it was pretty hard to summarise, and dominates the slides. I
hope it was interesting at least. It was something concrete that I could
share.

At the end of the day, you all know what D code looks like anyway. When our
guys write D code, it looks more or less like you expect, and it just
works. Nothing really special about it.
Naturally, I couldn't discuss specifics of code written in D, since they're
game-specific features, and protected by NDA.

In the last segment, I did give a high-level glance over some of the things
that basically all our programmers upon first contact immediately
appreciated when working with D. Maybe they seem trivial, but it doesn't
hurt to re-enforce that they are very strong features of the language that
everyone falls in love with immediately.

I guess, in summary, sorry you were underwhelmed/disappointed. To be
honest, I was too, I'd hoped I could offer more. I think a lot of other
people did too... but maybe next year there will be another one with an
additional year's practical experience...? :)
Jun 25 2013
parent "Joakim" <joakim airpost.net> writes:
On Wednesday, 26 June 2013 at 03:22:16 UTC, Manu wrote:

 I guess, in summary, sorry you were underwhelmed/disappointed. 
 To be
 honest, I was too, I'd hoped I could offer more. I think a lot 
 of other
 people did too... but maybe next year there will be another one 
 with an
 additional year's practical experience...? :)


No need to apologize or defend your talk.  I was simply expecting 
a talk about "Using D Alongside a Game Engine," not "Integrating 
D into an Existing C++ Game Engine." ;) Your talk was a nice 
technical introduction to the latter, I'm sure it was very useful 
for those wondering about the potential pitfalls of integrating 
with C++ and it was kind of amazing all the hoops you jumped 
through.  The last part of your talk, where you talked about 
actual D use, was what I was looking forward to the whole talk 
being about.  Maybe next year, :) as you say.
Jun 25 2013