digitalmars.D - Real D
- Marconi (19/19) Apr 13 The fact that C still being used today is a clear sign that all
- Dejan Lekic (10/15) Apr 13 Nonsense. C is still being used today simply because it is deeply
- Marconi (4/20) Apr 13 Why nonsense? I agree with you. C still runs the world, still the
- Steven Schveighoffer (5/8) Apr 13 C is not the best programming language, by a longshot. I would
- Chris Piker (22/25) Apr 18 C programmer here. I've written thousands of lines of new C code
- Atila Neves (2/9) Apr 19 Awesome that D worked out for you!
- ShowMeTheWay (15/19) Apr 20 This so called 'questioning' is inevitable for D, so best to
- Marconi (27/29) Apr 23 Vlang - Simple language for building maintainable programs
- zjh (2/3) Apr 23 +1.
- bachmeier (8/12) Apr 23 As long as you're willing to ignore all the evidence, I agree.
- Elias (0xEAB) (2/4) Apr 23 A refreshing take!
- Marconi (11/15) Apr 24 Rust, Zig, Vlang, Odin, C2, C3, etc and etc.
- Monkyyy (4/21) Apr 24 D isn't going to replace c, the most important part of c is
- ShowMeTheWay (12/16) Apr 24 Your world view is not my world view.
- Elias (0xEAB) (8/11) Apr 25 I’m not sure why this was posted as a reply to my message, but
- ShowMeTheWay (16/19) Apr 24 module nogc_test;
- cc (7/10) Apr 25 Thank you.😊
- Quirin Schroll (31/61) Apr 25 Only a propaganda mistake. For most applications, the kind of
- Alexandru Ermicioi (6/7) Apr 13 It means that there are no resources at migrating to better
- matheus (14/18) Apr 13 I don't think that is how you measure things. Otherwise the lack
- Alexandru Ermicioi (8/16) Apr 13 The point is that being mainstream doesn't mean it is a good
- zjh (4/18) Apr 13 +1.
- Walter Bright (2/5) Apr 13 Sounds like BetterC!
- Salih Dincer (6/11) Apr 14 Already D offers us a better C experience. If you don't want it
- Doigt (54/69) Apr 14 This is fallacious reasoning. You can find out if an argument is
- Martyn (78/84) Apr 15 D is a swiss army knife of programming languages. It supports
- Doigt (7/20) Apr 15 I have criticized the state of D's horrible documentation for as
- Liam McGillivray (22/33) Apr 20 I've never even looked at it until just now. It's very, very
- electricface (2/8) Apr 16 Diverting different user groups may be a good idea.
- tony (12/30) Apr 24 I don't think you are going to get Java programmers on board
- Lance Bachmeier (4/7) Apr 24 Very few D programmers would agree with the claim that GC is bad.
- H. S. Teoh (8/17) Apr 24 It's only a vocal minority. D users who are relatively happy with the
- Guillaume Piolat (5/7) Apr 25 Keep in mind even the D programmers that don't use the GC in
- Marconi (7/14) Apr 25 Copyright © 1999-2024 by the D Language Foundation
- Sergey (3/4) Apr 25 What are your main languages?
- Elias (0xEAB) (3/5) Apr 25 Nonsense! Even you do care so much about D that you keep
- ShadoLight (18/25) Apr 26 Think about what you are claiming...
- user1234 (3/18) Apr 26 Seriously, programming languages have this rare ability to turn
- user1234 (9/16) Apr 25 I'll add: Just check with valgrind programs made by people who
The fact that C still being used today is a clear sign that all language creators failed badly in not seeing the advantages of C, focused only on the disadvantages and exaggerated creating features that no one cares, creating too much possibilities of doing the same thing, getting only learning difficulties. What D should be? C with fat pointers, no header files and a big OO standard library. That's it. A better C. A new C. 90% C + 5% Cpp + 5% Java. C++ has the advantage of being compatible, but didn't solve the main pointer's problem. Java is almost this, but VM was a terrible decision (great only for marketing) and GC is good for bad programmers (sorry). Dlang displease C/C++ programmers for having GC and didn't get any of Java programmers. It's time to clean Dlang and get all the C/C++/Java programmers onboard of this new clean, simple, fast and easy to use programming language. Only Walter can lead to this path!
Apr 13
On Saturday, 13 April 2024 at 13:55:50 UTC, Marconi wrote:The fact that C still being used today is a clear sign that all language creators failed badly in not seeing the advantages of C, focused only on the disadvantages and exaggerated creating features that no one cares, creating too much possibilities of doing the same thing, getting only learning difficulties.Nonsense. C is still being used today simply because it is deeply rooted in everything. All major operating systems today are still largely done in C. Not to mention the libc being used by literally every piece of modern software... Pick your 20 favourite pieces of opensource software that you use every day, that are older than 5-6 years. - It is most likely that 18 of them are entirely done in C. Example: nginx - think how many websites are running on top of it. Similar story is Apache web server...
Apr 13
On Saturday, 13 April 2024 at 14:14:34 UTC, Dejan Lekic wrote:On Saturday, 13 April 2024 at 13:55:50 UTC, Marconi wrote:Why nonsense? I agree with you. C still runs the world, still the best programming language. We need just a better c, not more and more stuff.The fact that C still being used today is a clear sign that all language creators failed badly in not seeing the advantages of C, focused only on the disadvantages and exaggerated creating features that no one cares, creating too much possibilities of doing the same thing, getting only learning difficulties.Nonsense. C is still being used today simply because it is deeply rooted in everything. All major operating systems today are still largely done in C. Not to mention the libc being used by literally every piece of modern software... Pick your 20 favourite pieces of opensource software that you use every day, that are older than 5-6 years. - It is most likely that 18 of them are entirely done in C. Example: nginx - think how many websites are running on top of it. Similar story is Apache web server...
Apr 13
On Saturday, 13 April 2024 at 15:17:12 UTC, Marconi wrote:Why nonsense? I agree with you. C still runs the world, still the best programming language. We need just a better c, not more and more stuff.C is not the best programming language, by a longshot. I would hate to write code in C. It's just that the C ecosystem is *vast*. -Steve
Apr 13
On Saturday, 13 April 2024 at 18:32:12 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:C is not the best programming language, by a longshot. I would hate to write code in C. It's just that the C ecosystem is *vast*.C programmer here. I've written thousands of lines of new C code just this year (new features for a large existing code-base). For what it's worth, D is the first compiled language to get me to enthusiastically change languages. I tried a few others first. C++ boost library errors were just too damn hard to grok, and the associated tool chain was mega-bloated. Go was missing too many features. Rust was bizarre. In contrast, D is terse, almost a flexible as python, and not too opinionated, so I selected it as the best option at the time and haven't looked back. Anyway, I think the D core developers are doing a lot of things right and the continual questioning of the core language philosophy seems like a waste of time to me. I was able to accomplish tasks in D in 2023 that I would never have attempted in C + Python. I'm able to support a whole space mission's science ground support architecture pretty much on my own. D let me do that. Other languages probably could have too, but I know this one did and I appreciate everyone's work in getting D this far. Thanks for the tools, they make my job easier.
Apr 18
Atila Neves <atila.neves gmail.com> On Friday, 19 April 2024 at 04:05:22 UTC, Chris Piker wrote:On Saturday, 13 April 2024 at 18:32:12 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:Awesome that D worked out for you![...]C programmer here. I've written thousands of lines of new C code just this year (new features for a large existing code-base). [...]
Apr 19
On Friday, 19 April 2024 at 04:05:22 UTC, Chris Piker wrote:... Anyway, I think the D core developers are doing a lot of things right and the continual questioning of the core language philosophy seems like a waste of time to me.....This so called 'questioning' is inevitable for D, so best to 'make peace' with that. Thats because D is torn between being a language with 1970's style manual memory management and its VERY VERY VERY VERY strong interopability with C, on the one-hand, and on the other - having 21st century style automatic memory management, and an ever increasing focus on being a 'memory safe' language. These two approaches are difficult to reconcile, philosophically ;-) That they can be reconciled technically, at a language and compiler level, is a bit of a masterpiece really - and btw, *that* is the 'Real D'. Trying to reconcile these two very different approaches, comes with a cost - and that too is the 'Real D'.
Apr 20
On Sunday, 21 April 2024 at 03:47:08 UTC, ShowMeTheWay wrote:These two approaches are difficult to reconcile, philosophically ;-)Vlang - Simple language for building maintainable programs Ziglang - Focus on debugging your application rather than debugging your programming language knowledge. (simple, maintainable) Rust - Reliable and efficient software. C++ - C with Zero Cost Abstraction D - D shines from low-level control to high-level abstraction. Fast code, [running?]fast. C - Simple. Efficiency. Close-to-Hardware Programming. "Nothing is better than C" "When i see C, i see the assembler" - Linus Java - "Write once, run anywhere." Not so true, but work great in terms of propaganda. GUI in java sucks, its better create different efficient programs for each system than just a one bad java software. What Java really has great its a big standard API. So, the right order of principles: Simple (maintainable), fast, big organized standard library. That's why C still shines. Its still simple and fast. Thats's why everybody wants replace C++. Its fast, but hard to learn and mantain. Thats's why everybody wants replace Java. Its simple, but slow. Thats's why Rust is growing but will die. Its fast, but hard and becoming more and more hard. If D create some new way to make manual memory management easily, in such a way that the lovers of GC would not be so furious... the language could reach almost the perfection. Default GC was the biggest D mistake.
Apr 23
On Tuesday, 23 April 2024 at 14:56:50 UTC, Marconi wrote:Default GC was the biggest D mistake.+1.
Apr 23
On Tuesday, 23 April 2024 at 14:56:50 UTC, Marconi wrote:If D create some new way to make manual memory management easily, in such a way that the lovers of GC would not be so furious... the language could reach almost the perfection. Default GC was the biggest D mistake.As long as you're willing to ignore all the evidence, I agree. The GC has never prevented anyone from doing good things without the GC. Look at the excellent work on Mir, for instance. The things the anti-GC crowd complains about simply a reflection of the lack of demand for D as a non-GC language. If there was demand, someone would already have done the work making that stuff available.
Apr 23
On Tuesday, 23 April 2024 at 15:46:24 UTC, bachmeier wrote:If there was demand, someone would already have done the work making that stuff available.A refreshing take!
Apr 23
On Wednesday, 24 April 2024 at 01:34:15 UTC, Elias (0xEAB) wrote:On Tuesday, 23 April 2024 at 15:46:24 UTC, bachmeier wrote:Rust, Zig, Vlang, Odin, C2, C3, etc and etc. People are trying harder but making even more mistakes than D. This should be obvious, but I think people need to hear it out loud. D SHOULD BE A C AND C++ REPLACEMENT. D is still Walterlang, not D. Garbage collection is babysitting, socialism, other people's code taking care of your code. That's not how great programmers are created. Thats not how Walter was made. We need D, a C/C++ killer.If there was demand, someone would already have done the work making that stuff available.A refreshing take!
Apr 24
On Wednesday, 24 April 2024 at 15:25:27 UTC, Marconi wrote:On Wednesday, 24 April 2024 at 01:34:15 UTC, Elias (0xEAB) wrote:D isn't going to replace c, the most important part of c is portable as and zig is so much futher ahead, while havin several of the good features like a actually reasonable compile speedOn Tuesday, 23 April 2024 at 15:46:24 UTC, bachmeier wrote:Rust, Zig, Vlang, Odin, C2, C3, etc and etc. People are trying harder but making even more mistakes than D. This should be obvious, but I think people need to hear it out loud. D SHOULD BE A C AND C++ REPLACEMENT. D is still Walterlang, not D. Garbage collection is babysitting, socialism, other people's code taking care of your code. That's not how great programmers are created. Thats not how Walter was made. We need D, a C/C++ killer.If there was demand, someone would already have done the work making that stuff available.A refreshing take!
Apr 24
On Wednesday, 24 April 2024 at 15:25:27 UTC, Marconi wrote:... Garbage collection is babysitting, socialism, other people's code taking care of your code. That's not how great programmers are created. Thats not how Walter was made.Your world view is not my world view. In my world, a 'good' programmer, is someone who (at the very least) understands *both* the upsides and downsides of manual memory management, automatic memory management, oop and non-oop. Only when this applies to you have you attained enlightenment (i.e you can see things as they really are). And only once you attain englightenment, are you then on the path to towards becoming a great programmer (like Walter). And then you are worthy citizen of Dlan..d. For some though, it can take at least 7 life-times to reach enlightenment.
Apr 24
On Wednesday, 24 April 2024 at 15:25:27 UTC, Marconi wrote:This should be obvious, but I think people need to hear it out loud. D SHOULD BE A C AND C++ REPLACEMENT.I’m not sure why this was posted as a reply to my message, but talking about “replacements”… Why focus so much on replacing things? For me, D happens to be the tool of choice. Not because I replaced something else with it, but rather because it’s the first option I reach to when writing new programs (where it makes sense).
Apr 25
On Tuesday, 23 April 2024 at 14:56:50 UTC, Marconi wrote:If D create some new way to make manual memory management easily, in such a way that the lovers of GC would not be so furious... the language could reach almost the perfection.module nogc_test; class Duck { import core.stdc.stdio : printf; nogc this(){ printf("quack! quack!\n"); } nogc ~this(){ printf("I'm flyin away now......\n"); } } nogc void test() { scope auto d = new Duck(); // allocated on the stack } nogc void main() { test; }
Apr 24
On Tuesday, 23 April 2024 at 14:56:50 UTC, Marconi wrote:If D create some new way to make manual memory management easily, in such a way that the lovers of GC would not be so furious... the language could reach almost the perfection.Thank you.😊 I'll accept GC as the default, just as long as I have the option to choose and not have the entire ideology treated as second class citizens. The open contempt exists in this thread and others. And there's a forced insistence that the people complaining "don't actually use D" which is just ridiculous.
Apr 25
On Tuesday, 23 April 2024 at 14:56:50 UTC, Marconi wrote:On Sunday, 21 April 2024 at 03:47:08 UTC, ShowMeTheWay wrote:Only a propaganda mistake. For most applications, the kind of memory management is largely irrelevant as long as there is no leak. GC at CTFE is brilliant. C++ tries to do manual memory management at CTFE (called `constexpr` functions) and it took them almost 10 years to get it done (C++11 introduced `constexpr` and C++20 had `constexpr` dynamic memory allocation), and even there, e.g. a `std::vector` can’t leave the CTFE environment and become a compile-time constant. In D, if I need a compile-time array of non-trivial pre-calculated values that can be generated by some function, I can do this: ```d static immutable int[] values = { int[] result; // algorithm fills `result` return result; }(); // runs at ctfe ``` If I want or need to, I can convert this to a static array: ```d enum int[] _values = {…}(); static immutable int[_values.length] values = _values; ``` This runs at compile-time guaranteed. It’s not an optimization. As far as I know, this is not easily done in C++. It’s certainly doable using templates, but it’s not doable in C++23 using non-template `constexpr` functions and e.g. `std::vector`. If you don’t want the GC to run, use ` nogc` or full-on `-betterC`. Even in BetterC mode, you can use all of D’s features like GC at CTFE.These two approaches are difficult to reconcile, philosophically ;-)Vlang - Simple language for building maintainable programs Ziglang - Focus on debugging your application rather than debugging your programming language knowledge. (simple, maintainable) Rust - Reliable and efficient software. C++ - C with Zero Cost Abstraction D - D shines from low-level control to high-level abstraction. Fast code, [running?]fast. C - Simple. Efficiency. Close-to-Hardware Programming. "Nothing is better than C" "When i see C, i see the assembler" - Linus Java - "Write once, run anywhere." Not so true, but work great in terms of propaganda. GUI in java sucks, its better create different efficient programs for each system than just a one bad java software. What Java really has great its a big standard API. So, the right order of principles: Simple (maintainable), fast, big organized standard library. That's why C still shines. Its still simple and fast. Thats's why everybody wants replace C++. Its fast, but hard to learn and mantain. Thats's why everybody wants replace Java. Its simple, but slow. Thats's why Rust is growing but will die. Its fast, but hard and becoming more and more hard. If D create some new way to make manual memory management easily, in such a way that the lovers of GC would not be so furious... the language could reach almost the perfection. Default GC was the biggest D mistake.
Apr 25
On Saturday, 13 April 2024 at 15:17:12 UTC, Marconi wrote:C still runs the world, still the best programming language.It means that there are no resources at migrating to better language, not that it is the best. If it was the best, then it would've been used a lot across all domains of software development, it's clearly not the case in web development.
Apr 13
On Saturday, 13 April 2024 at 18:34:43 UTC, Alexandru Ermicioi wrote:... If it was the best, then it would've been used a lot across all domains of software development, it's clearly not the case in web development.I don't think that is how you measure things. Otherwise the lack of popularity of D in the mainstream would be because is the worse language than C++ or Java? (According to your comment). Perhaps other languages are easier and thus gain traction faster? software industry. By the way microsoft do this by going into companies and giving away licenses of OS, Editors and cloud services for very free or very cheap. Where I work which by the way is one of biggest private health care company, we use everything from Azure because of this scheme. Matheus.
Apr 13
On Saturday, 13 April 2024 at 18:44:27 UTC, matheus wrote:On Saturday, 13 April 2024 at 18:34:43 UTC, Alexandru Ermicioi wrote: I don't think that is how you measure things. Otherwise the lack of popularity of D in the mainstream would be because is the worse language than C++ or Java? (According to your comment).The point is that being mainstream doesn't mean it is a good language. Each language has it's own history, features, and C in this case, was just one of the first widely used languages, eventually entering deeply into most of low level software, or perfomance oriented one, but it doesn't mean that it is the best language and that you should position D as successor of C only.in software industry.Btw, I'm using Java at work mainly.
Apr 13
On Saturday, 13 April 2024 at 13:55:50 UTC, Marconi wrote:What D should be? C with fat pointers, no header files and a big OO standard library. That's it. A better C. A new C. 90% C + 5% Cpp + 5% Java. C++ has the advantage of being compatible, but didn't solve the main pointer's problem. Java is almost this, but VM was a terrible decision (great only for marketing) and GC is good for bad programmers (sorry). Dlang displease C/C++ programmers for having GC and didn't get any of Java programmers. It's time to clean Dlang and get all the C/C++/Java programmers onboard of this new clean, simple, fast and easy to use programming language. Only Walter can lead to this path!+1. Yes, `better support` for the C++ features and `absorption` of `C++ users`.
Apr 13
On 4/13/2024 6:55 AM, Marconi wrote:What D should be? C with fat pointers, no header files and a big OO standard library. That's it. A better C. A new C. 90% C + 5% Cpp + 5% Java.Sounds like BetterC!
Apr 13
On Saturday, 13 April 2024 at 13:55:50 UTC, Marconi wrote:... It's time to clean Dlang and get all the C/C++/Java programmers onboard of this new clean, simple, fast and easy to use programming language. Only Walter can lead to this path!Already D offers us a better C experience. If you don't want it very, very good, don't use it! What you don't use will still be in D, it should be. Why remove features we have desired and placed in D for years? SDB 79
Apr 14
On Saturday, 13 April 2024 at 13:55:50 UTC, Marconi wrote:The fact that C still being used today is a clear sign that all language creators failed badly in not seeing the advantages of C, focused only on the disadvantages and exaggerated creating features that no one cares, creating too much possibilities of doing the same thing, getting only learning difficulties.This is fallacious reasoning. You can find out if an argument is fallacious by reducing the reasoning to its atomic components or by switching out the subjects of the argument. In order to remove the irrationality once and for all, I have applied your exact reasoning 3 times for demonstrating my point: The fact that bicycles are still being used today is a clear sign that car manufacturers failed badly in not seeing the advantages of bicycles, focused only on the disadvantages and exaggerated creating features that no one cares, creating too many possibilities of doing the same thing, getting only learning difficulties. The fact that margarine is still being used today is a clear sign that butter producers failed badly in not seeing the advantages of margarine, focused only on the disadvantages and exaggerated taste and health benefits that no one cares, creating too many possibilities of doing the same thing, getting only learning difficulties. The fact that dictatorships still exist today is a clear sign that democracies failed badly in not seeing the advantages of dictatorship, focused only on the disadvantages and exaggerated individual rights and privileges one cares, creating too many possibilities of doing the same thing, getting only learning difficulties. correlation != causationWhat D should be? C with fat pointers, no header files and a big OO standard library. That's it. A better C. A new C. 90% C + 5% Cpp + 5% Java.It already exists, it's called BetterC. You could also just abstain yourself from using the features you don't like without using BetterC that way you can still use the libraries other people wrote. Alternatively, you could make your own language. That's what the creators of C2 and C3 did. Maybe you could call it C4, I'm sure it would explode in popularity with a name like that. Anyways nobody is going to downgrade D just because you don't like extra features that you don't even have to use.C++ has the advantage of being compatible, but didn't solve the main pointer's problem. Java is almost this, but VM was a terrible decision (great only for marketing) and GC is good for bad programmers (sorry). Dlang displease C/C++ programmers for having GC and didn't get any of Java programmers.D is also highly compatible with C, more so than most languages if not all of them. It's even able to interface with most other languages directly (like C or C++) or with some tinkering with the advanced features of D (like in the case of R and Rust). D doesn't displease C and C++ programmers for having a GC. The GC and the runtime are optional after all and writing your own stuff without using the included batteries is the pleasure of most hardcore fans of those two languages. C and C++ programmers dislike D for the same reason they dislike all other languages: D is neither C nor C++. C programmers will only use C and C++ programmers will only use C++. They are not interested in learning any other language. GC is good for all programmers, talented and terrible. It saves time for the good ones and it saves the bad ones from writing a time bomb. And even the good ones can make mistakes. Memory allocation errors are not always obvious and may go unnoticed for a long time. You're not only required to be good and diligent, you're required to be perfect. You may not commit one single mistake. Nobody's perfect and I'm sure you are far from perfect yourself seeing the level of logic in your reasoning; I'm afraid of what it looks like in your code.
Apr 14
On Saturday, 13 April 2024 at 13:55:50 UTC, Marconi wrote:.. snip What D should be? C with fat pointers, no header files and a big OO standard library. That's it. A better C. A new C. 90% C + 5% Cpp + 5% Java. .. snipD is a swiss army knife of programming languages. It supports many ways to get a problem done. However... D can also be open to disagreements because... it is a swiss army knife! What I mean is D is trying to please everyone. It can be very difficult to get right when you have programmers from different career backgrounds throwing in their views of what D should (and shouldn't) be. In part we have a confusion of what D is trying to be. Some see (and others). The rest see it as a replacement of all the above. I can be guilty of this as well. I have my **preferences** of where I would like D to go. We all do. Regardless, D is here adnd its current position stays. I dont think anyone at this point for *force out* features just because. Reality is while some want to ditch the GC, there are others on here that would want to force it on you. I think we should be targeting the C\C++ guys but competition is growing. We not only have Rust, but others like Zig and Odin. especially when developer has gained experience and familiarity of the language. Also factor in job security. Mid-to-Large SQL Server, etc, is not going anywhere. It is not about individual devs, but companies themselves enforcing what you will be using. It is a hard battle to win in my opinion. The more I have used D, the more I have been using BetterC. I have become familiar with what I can and cannot do with BetterC. It really is experience. However, I don't think it is easy when you are new to D, and browsing around the website for the first time. and Guide is good. Sadly, those that come from a C or C++ background are likely put off pretty quickly. The landing page, to me, makes D come across as a garbage collected language **only**. *Maybe this is the intention by the core team as this will lose interest for certain newcommers and focus on their main audience. It is possible.* Continuing, I come across pages like so:- - https://dlang.org/ - https://dlang.org/overview.html Eventually I see some code like filter! or Ranges, etc. I would be very impressed with the compiler likely telling me to "perhaps import std.stdio;" -- so far, so good. Once I understood some basic D features, I would then be looking at the Garbage Collector. Can I turn it off? I couldn't find the answers I wanted on the website. The overview had a sentence for "Explicit Memory Management" with **no links**. "Automatic Memory Management" on the other hand had more text and **a link!** Even the Garbage Collector page did not redirect me to how to disable it. At least, I could not see it. I tried searching on the page but unsuccessful. - https://dlang.org/spec/garbage.html I am sure, at this point, I would be googling around, or using Stack overflow or reddit, etc. Now I would be trying to find answers outside of the D website. Once I discovered -betterC I would struggle to understand why it is called "Better C". I am trying to learn D afterall. After adding the flag and running the compiler, I now receive the following sample errors:- - cannot use try-catch.. - template instance std.stdio.File.write!.. - TypeInfo_Class.. What? I did not use try-catch! Oh, so I cannot use Ranges. What? std.stdio.File.write causes an error? This worked before i added -betterC. Oh.. stdio, or parts of it, must be using the GC. What? BetterC is just better C. Guess I cannot improve my C++ that has classes? The learning would continue but there is a chance, if the site did not lose my interest earlier... you have now. Maybe the DLang Tour needs a little more TLC. Start off with their purpose of using D. Maybe BetterC should be there from the get go! branch off in 2 directions. You want to try do in all its glory.. go here. Want to turn off the Garbage Collector.. go betterC! etetera!!
Apr 15
On Monday, 15 April 2024 at 16:40:20 UTC, Martyn wrote:What? I did not use try-catch! Oh, so I cannot use Ranges. What? std.stdio.File.write causes an error? This worked before i added -betterC. Oh.. stdio, or parts of it, must be using the GC. What? BetterC is just better C. Guess I cannot improve my C++ that has classes? The learning would continue but there is a chance, if the site did not lose my interest earlier... you have now. Maybe the DLang Tour needs a little more TLC. Start off with their purpose of using D. Maybe BetterC should be there from the get go! branch off in 2 directions. You want to try do in all its glory.. go here. Want to turn off the Garbage Collector.. go betterC! etetera!!I have criticized the state of D's horrible documentation for as long as I've been here. The documentation is lacking, it's never really explicit and it uses pure D jargon that is not easily understandable from an outside perspective. At this point, I learn more by just asking on discord than "reading the fucking manual".
Apr 15
On Monday, 15 April 2024 at 21:40:14 UTC, Doigt wrote:I've never even looked at it until just now. It's very, very brief. Sure, I suppose it can be made to be fancier overall. I suppose having two branches is a good idea; one for systems programming that includes ` nogc` and `betterC`, the other for those who like it easy. I'm not sure what's the best way to quickly communicate this.Maybe the DLang Tour needs a little more TLC. Start off with their purpose of using D. Maybe BetterC should be there from the get go! branch off in 2 directions. You want to try do in all its glory.. go here. Want to turn off the Garbage Collector.. go betterC! etetera!!I have criticized the state of D's horrible documentation for as long as I've been here. The documentation is lacking, it's never really explicit and it uses pure D jargon that is not easily understandable from an outside perspective. At this point, I learn more by just asking on discord than "reading the fucking manual".Is this about Phobos, or something else. My perception was that the Phobos documentation is pretty good, though I suppose it can be clearer in some cases as to what types a function accepts as arguments. I don't think it's any worse than the PHP library documentation. Now would someone coming from a C or C++ background be more or less forgiving than me? Someone from such a background would have programming experience that may give them better ability to make the most of lousy documentation, but then again, they may have seen more good documentation than I have. Given how obscure this language is, I was pleased to see how much documentation there is. It was interesting to discover that the writers are largely the same people I've been interacting with here.
Apr 20
On Monday, 15 April 2024 at 16:40:20 UTC, Martyn wrote:On Saturday, 13 April 2024 at 13:55:50 UTC, Marconi wrote:Maybe the DLang Tour needs a little more TLC. Start off with their purpose of using D. Maybe BetterC should be there from the get go! branch off in 2 directions. You want to try do in all its glory.. go here. Want to turn off the Garbage Collector.. go betterC! etetera!!Diverting different user groups may be a good idea.
Apr 16
On Saturday, 13 April 2024 at 13:55:50 UTC, Marconi wrote:The fact that C still being used today is a clear sign that all language creators failed badly in not seeing the advantages of C, focused only on the disadvantages and exaggerated creating features that no one cares, creating too much possibilities of doing the same thing, getting only learning difficulties. What D should be? C with fat pointers, no header files and a big OO standard library. That's it. A better C. A new C. 90% C + 5% Cpp + 5% Java. C++ has the advantage of being compatible, but didn't solve the main pointer's problem. Java is almost this, but VM was a terrible decision (great only for marketing) and GC is good for bad programmers (sorry). Dlang displease C/C++ programmers for having GC and didn't get any of Java programmers. It's time to clean Dlang and get all the C/C++/Java programmers onboard of this new clean, simple, fast and easy to use programming language.I don't think you are going to get Java programmers on board without a really big object-oriented standard library. And if you remove garbage collection (which they don't mind) you would need to add in reference counted automatic memory management for them. But a big problem would be that one thing most D forum users agree on is that both garbage collection and object-orientation are bad (so why did they choose D?). That is also a modern C++ programmer belief. But it is not a Java programmer belief. So it doesn’t seem possible at this point to satisfy D afficionados and Java programmers due to conflicting beliefs on object-oriented programming (and garbage collection to a lesser extent).
Apr 24
On Wednesday, 24 April 2024 at 22:37:44 UTC, tony wrote:But a big problem would be that one thing most D forum users agree on is that both garbage collection and object-orientation are bad (so why did they choose D?).Very few D programmers would agree with the claim that GC is bad. A lot of non-D users and dabblers drop by to say it should be removed from the language.
Apr 24
On Thu, Apr 25, 2024 at 12:24:05AM +0000, Lance Bachmeier via Digitalmars-d wrote:On Wednesday, 24 April 2024 at 22:37:44 UTC, tony wrote:It's only a vocal minority. D users who are relatively happy with the GC generally don't talk about it. And I'm tired of debunking the same old repeated complaints that have been repeated hundreds of times over the years. T -- All men are mortal. Socrates is mortal. Therefore all men are Socrates.But a big problem would be that one thing most D forum users agree on is that both garbage collection and object-orientation are bad (so why did they choose D?).Very few D programmers would agree with the claim that GC is bad. A lot of non-D users and dabblers drop by to say it should be removed from the language.
Apr 24
On Wednesday, 24 April 2024 at 22:37:44 UTC, tony wrote:most D forum users agree on is that both garbage collection and object-orientation are bad (so why did they choose D?)Keep in mind even the D programmers that don't use the GC in production use it in prototyping and internal tooling. So I'd say we all appreciate the GC in using D, by a large majority, and benefit from it.
Apr 25
On Thursday, 25 April 2024 at 12:58:23 UTC, Guillaume Piolat wrote:On Wednesday, 24 April 2024 at 22:37:44 UTC, tony wrote:Copyright © 1999-2024 by the D Language Foundation 1999 1999 1999 1999 1999 1999 1999 1999 1999 1999 1999 ??????????????????????????? Since 1999 nobody cares about Dlang. PLEASE, ASK YOURSELF, WHY NOBODY CARES ABOUT DLANG!?most D forum users agree on is that both garbage collection and object-orientation are bad (so why did they choose D?)Keep in mind even the D programmers that don't use the GC in production use it in prototyping and internal tooling. So I'd say we all appreciate the GC in using D, by a large majority, and benefit from it.
Apr 25
On Thursday, 25 April 2024 at 14:48:20 UTC, Marconi wrote:Since 1999 nobody cares about Dlang.What are your main languages? In which area are you working?
Apr 25
On Thursday, 25 April 2024 at 14:48:20 UTC, Marconi wrote:Since 1999 nobody cares about Dlang. PLEASE, ASK YOURSELF, WHY NOBODY CARES ABOUT DLANG!?Nonsense! Even you do care so much about D that you keep participating in this thread.
Apr 25
On Thursday, 25 April 2024 at 14:48:20 UTC, Marconi wrote:On Thursday, 25 April 2024 at 12:58:23 UTC, Guillaume Piolat wrote:...Copyright © 1999-2024 by the D Language Foundation 1999 1999 1999 1999 1999 1999 1999 1999 1999 1999 1999 ??????????????????????????? Since 1999 nobody cares about Dlang. PLEASE, ASK YOURSELF, WHY NOBODY CARES ABOUT DLANG!?Think about what you are claiming... ... that a language, in existence since 1999, now - 25 years later - STILL EXISTS! ... considering that, according to you, NOBODY CARES ABOUT IT! How did it survive for 25 years if no-one cared? What bought you here? Why are you still here, considering that YOU (apparently) DON'T CARE? You should have concluded the exact opposite - that "1999-2024" proves hat there were a sufficient number of people that cared (by using D!) to ensure that the language survived (and evolved). D has any number of issues that frustrate people and that they complain about, but that is because they "care" enough to use the language. And I suspect even you are... in the exact same boat. If you were right, we wouldn't be here on the D forum discussing this ... because there are no discussions/debates going on about dead languages.
Apr 26
On Thursday, 25 April 2024 at 14:48:20 UTC, Marconi wrote:On Thursday, 25 April 2024 at 12:58:23 UTC, Guillaume Piolat wrote:Seriously, programming languages have this rare ability to turn people so mad, it's incredible. So much fanboy-ism and hater-ism.On Wednesday, 24 April 2024 at 22:37:44 UTC, tony wrote:Copyright © 1999-2024 by the D Language Foundation 1999 1999 1999 1999 1999 1999 1999 1999 1999 1999 1999 ??????????????????????????? Since 1999 nobody cares about Dlang. PLEASE, ASK YOURSELF, WHY NOBODY CARES ABOUT DLANG!?most D forum users agree on is that both garbage collection and object-orientation are bad (so why did they choose D?)Keep in mind even the D programmers that don't use the GC in production use it in prototyping and internal tooling. So I'd say we all appreciate the GC in using D, by a large majority, and benefit from it.
Apr 26
On Thursday, 25 April 2024 at 12:58:23 UTC, Guillaume Piolat wrote:On Wednesday, 24 April 2024 at 22:37:44 UTC, tony wrote:I'll add: Just check with valgrind programs made by people who think they manage memory better than a GC. There are several things people dont think of. To name two: copy construction, alignment when your work with value types. Your (not nominative, more generally) own memory management system is likely to be worse than D GC ;). Invalid reads, invalid writes, double frees, etc. La fiesta.most D forum users agree on is that both garbage collection and object-orientation are bad (so why did they choose D?)Keep in mind even the D programmers that don't use the GC in production use it in prototyping and internal tooling. So I'd say we all appreciate the GC in using D, by a large majority, and benefit from it.
Apr 25