www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D - This Week in D

reply Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQ=?= writes:
This Week in D is a valuable source for information, but it is 
also on the front page and shapes how D is perceived.

It just doesn't look good or factual when it talks about "flame 
throwing" and "flamewar". I don't think there has been anything 
that warrants that kind of terminology this week. Other weeks, 
maybe, but "flaming" usually refers to prolonged personal attacks.

Maybe one should reconsider the entertainment aspect of the 
newsletter and stick to factual information that is relevant for 
the reader.
Nov 30 2015
next sibling parent reply Bubbasaur <bubba hotmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 30 November 2015 at 12:52:43 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad 
wrote:

 ...


There we go, another +200 replies and drama.
Nov 30 2015
parent reply Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQ=?= writes:
On Monday, 30 November 2015 at 13:34:20 UTC, Bubbasaur wrote:

 On Monday, 30 November 2015 at 12:52:43 UTC, Ola Fosheim 
 Grøstad wrote:

 ...


 There we go, another +200 replies and drama.


No drama, the sole purpose of the front page is to inform 
newcomers and it has much more impact than the forums. It would 
therefore be a good idea to keep the front page professional.

If there is not enough factual content for a weekly newsletter, 
then move to a bi-weekly.
Nov 30 2015
next sibling parent reply Bubbasaur <bubba hotmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 30 November 2015 at 14:07:03 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad 
wrote:

 No drama, the sole purpose of the front page is to inform 
 newcomers and it has much more impact than the forums. It would 
 therefore be a good idea to keep the front page professional.

 If there is not enough factual content for a weekly newsletter, 
 then move to a bi-weekly.


Sorry if it seemed rude but the message wasn't for you and in 
fact I agree with you, it was a bit strange that mention on the 
newsletter.

Bubba.
Nov 30 2015
parent Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQ=?= writes:
On Monday, 30 November 2015 at 19:01:59 UTC, Bubbasaur wrote:

 Sorry if it seemed rude but the message wasn't for you and in 
 fact I agree with you, it was a bit strange that mention on the 
 newsletter.

 Bubba.


*hugs*
Nov 30 2015
prev sibling parent reply ketmar <ketmar ketmar.no-ip.org> writes:
On Monday, 30 November 2015 at 14:07:03 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad 
wrote:

 therefore be a good idea to keep the front page professional.


"professional". this means "boring, uninteresting, written for 
witless idiots without sense of humor". the worst think we can do 
is start attracting such kind of people.
Nov 30 2015
parent reply Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQ=?= writes:
On Monday, 30 November 2015 at 20:07:10 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:

 I'll change it to "thread" on the front page.


:-)


On Monday, 30 November 2015 at 21:47:21 UTC, ketmar wrote:

 "professional". this means "boring, uninteresting, written for 
 witless idiots without sense of humor". the worst think we can 
 do is start attracting such kind of people.


You have 3 seconds to convince a random visitor that the site is 
worth his/her time. If I am looking for a tool the last thing I 
want is to try to download something from an emotional boy scouts 
club. But then again, may you are right. Maybe the forums need 
more boy scouts.
Nov 30 2015
next sibling parent reply Adam D. Ruppe <destructionator gmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 30 November 2015 at 21:52:34 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad 
wrote:

 You have 3 seconds to convince a random visitor that the site 
 is worth his/her time.


That's basically why i use the word 'flamewar' - it fits into a 
tweet while being pretty descriptive.

Though, indeed, the meaning among hacker communities and other 
parts of the internet is a bit different* so might as well reword 
it on the front page (I do think the content inside stands up 
pretty well though, and several of the posts match 'flame' by 
either definition).

* A flamewar among hackers doesn't need to be personal, profane, 
or particularly insulting. Just invested, long, and esoteric 
(which often appears pointless to those on the outside).
Nov 30 2015
next sibling parent Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQ=?= writes:
On Monday, 30 November 2015 at 22:32:50 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:

 * A flamewar among hackers doesn't need to be personal, 
 profane, or particularly insulting. Just invested, long, and 
 esoteric (which often appears pointless to those on the 
 outside).


Follow your own instincts, but I would personally be a bit 
careful about writing about emotional quarrels. Sometimes people 
are hurt on a personal level, whether they admit it or not, and 
getting it into an announcement might make it "more real" and 
make it more difficult to move on.
Nov 30 2015
prev sibling parent reply Meta <jared771 gmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 30 November 2015 at 22:32:50 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:

 On Monday, 30 November 2015 at 21:52:34 UTC, Ola Fosheim 
 Grøstad wrote:

 You have 3 seconds to convince a random visitor that the site 
 is worth his/her time.


 That's basically why i use the word 'flamewar' - it fits into a 
 tweet while being pretty descriptive.

 Though, indeed, the meaning among hacker communities and other 
 parts of the internet is a bit different* so might as well 
 reword it on the front page (I do think the content inside 
 stands up pretty well though, and several of the posts match 
 'flame' by either definition).

 * A flamewar among hackers doesn't need to be personal, 
 profane, or particularly insulting. Just invested, long, and 
 esoteric (which often appears pointless to those on the 
 outside).


I think it looked pretty pointless to people on the inside as well
Nov 30 2015
parent Idan Arye <GenericNPC gmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 30 November 2015 at 23:54:15 UTC, Meta wrote:

 On Monday, 30 November 2015 at 22:32:50 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe 
 wrote:

 [...]


 I think it looked pretty pointless to people on the inside as 
 well


Just because the discussion is pointless doesn't mean defeat is 
acceptable!
Nov 30 2015
prev sibling parent reply ketmar <ketmar ketmar.no-ip.org> writes:
On Monday, 30 November 2015 at 21:52:34 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad 
wrote:

 You have 3 seconds to convince a random visitor that the site 
 is worth his/her time. If I am looking for a tool the last 
 thing I want is to try to download something from an emotional 
 boy scouts club.


that's great: less SJW and other unstable persons. if someone is 
judging *programming* *language* with 3-second look at the 
site... well, i'd better not have such person on board.
Nov 30 2015
next sibling parent reply Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQ=?= writes:
On Tuesday, 1 December 2015 at 07:34:49 UTC, ketmar wrote:

 that's great: less SJW and other unstable persons. if someone 
 is judging *programming* *language* with 3-second look at the 
 site... well, i'd better not have such person on board.


But Social Justice Warriors are great fun!!!

Here's the deal: there is usually a correlation between 
presentation and content. If the front page is professional, then 
there is some hope that the product is too. If there is no 
editorial control on the front page, then there probably is chaos 
elsewhere too... That's a fair assumption to make that often 
holds true.
Dec 01 2015
parent reply BBaz <2b.temp gmx.com> writes:
On Tuesday, 1 December 2015 at 09:07:52 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad 
wrote:

 On Tuesday, 1 December 2015 at 07:34:49 UTC, ketmar wrote:

 that's great: less SJW and other unstable persons. if someone 
 is judging *programming* *language* with 3-second look at the 
 site... well, i'd better not have such person on board.


 But Social Justice Warriors are great fun!!!

 Here's the deal: there is usually a correlation between 
 presentation and content. If the front page is professional, 
 then there is some hope that the product is too. If there is no 
 editorial control on the front page, then there probably is 
 chaos elsewhere too... That's a fair assumption to make that 
 often holds true.


But the reallity is that the debat has happened. So, what do your 
propose ? To hide the reallity ?

More concretely, I accord you that maybe the word "flamewar" 
could be replaced by "animated debate"...but otherwise, pfft.
Dec 01 2015
parent reply Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQ=?= writes:
On Tuesday, 1 December 2015 at 09:33:12 UTC, BBaz wrote:

 But the reallity is that the debat has happened. So, what do 
 your propose ? To hide the reallity ?


Yeah! Be selective.

Just report facts that are of interest to a wider audience. There 
seems to be too little interesting content to fill a weekly.

A more condensed bi-weekly would look more interesting to 
visitors.
Dec 01 2015
next sibling parent BBaz <2b.temp gmx.com> writes:
On Tuesday, 1 December 2015 at 09:47:05 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad 
wrote:

 On Tuesday, 1 December 2015 at 09:33:12 UTC, BBaz wrote:

 But the reallity is that the debat has happened. So, what do 
 your propose ? To hide the reallity ?


 Yeah! Be selective.

 Just report facts that are of interest to a wider audience. 
 There seems to be too little interesting content to fill a 
 weekly.

 A more condensed bi-weekly would look more interesting to 
 visitors.


Ok, I understand your position now. I don't agree but I get your 
your point.
Dec 01 2015
prev sibling parent reply Adam D. Ruppe <destructionator gmail.com> writes:
On Tuesday, 1 December 2015 at 09:47:05 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad 
wrote:

 A more condensed bi-weekly would look more interesting to 
 visitors.


I actually think weekly pull request reports and such aren't all 
that interesting at all, that's why I like to do the tips and try 
to summarize things that might influence the future direction of 
D.

That's why, when I'm done talking about a thread, I usually give 
my opinion on where I think it is doing, like "it is unlikely 
anything will change as a result of this". We every so often try 
to publish roadmaps, but my experience has been that we get a 
better idea of where things are going by watching what topics 
come up more for discussion. And not just length of discussion or 
frequency of threads, but the attitude we see inside from a few 
key members.

....whoa, I just realized this is relevant to a proprietary 
project I'm working on.... weird that I didn't realize that until 
now...

Anyway though, I've been on the forum for a lot of years and have 
seen where the language has been and just try to distill that 
into where it is going too.



The other big thing is that I want to talk about where it is 
*now* instead of just what's happening this week. That's why 
there's tips, project write-ups, interviews, etc.

TWID's audience includes visitors, but its core are already D 
users at varying levels of activity who don't necessarily know 
all these things but want to.
Dec 01 2015
parent reply Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQ=?= writes:
On Tuesday, 1 December 2015 at 15:04:48 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:

 I actually think weekly pull request reports and such aren't 
 all that interesting at all, that's why I like to do the tips 
 and try to summarize things that might influence the future 
 direction of D.


Yes, tips are really cool and probably a good reason for people 
to read it. Forward looking "tidbits" are good and fun too.


 topics come up more for discussion. And not just length of 
 discussion or frequency of threads, but the attitude we see 
 inside from a few key members.


Sure.


 TWID's audience includes visitors, but its core are already D 
 users at varying levels of activity who don't necessarily know 
 all these things but want to.


It _is_ challenging to write for many different types of readers, 
newbies vs oldbies, random visitors that want to know status quo 
and which one want to appear attractive to, computer scientists 
vs teenagers etc. It is indeed much easier to write for a narrow 
group.

Personally I feel the downside of having a weekly issue is that 
only a couple of things "happen" each week. So a random person or 
more passive D user will get less of a sense that "things are 
happening". The upside is that active D users get something 
predictable each week. I only write from the perspective of  
appealing to "critical programmers" at the front page.

Other languages also have websites that rub me the wrong way by 
being "too personal" too (which implies small and unfinished). I 
think Rust does pretty well by taking the "clean technical 
information hub" approach, but that has nothing to do with the 
newsletter. :)
Dec 01 2015
parent reply Adam D. Ruppe <destructionator gmail.com> writes:
On Tuesday, 1 December 2015 at 15:54:20 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad 
wrote:

 Personally I feel the downside of having a weekly issue is that 
 only a couple of things "happen" each week. So a random person 
 or more passive D user will get less of a sense that "things 
 are happening".


On the other hand, if a lot happened each week, we'd look 
excessively unstable...

At least with a weekly thing, we look alive at first glance. 
There used to be people who look at the homepage and think 
everything was dead because the design isn't bootstrappy or 
whatever and thus obviously unmaintained.
Dec 01 2015
parent Andrei Alexandrescu <SeeWebsiteForEmail erdani.org> writes:
On 12/01/2015 11:21 AM, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:

 At least with a weekly thing, we look alive at first glance. There used
 to be people who look at the homepage and think everything was dead
 because the design isn't bootstrappy or whatever and thus obviously
 unmaintained.


FWIW to me a weekly is the sweet spot. There could be weeks where few 
things happen, like in July or whatever. "Slow week. Walter on vacation 
in Tibet teaching monks D and conga. Andrei got a fish tank and argues 
existentialism with a clam. Martin reportedly wrote a small script only 
with his left pinky." -- Andrei
Dec 01 2015
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Adam D. Ruppe <destructionator gmail.com> writes:
On Tuesday, 1 December 2015 at 07:34:49 UTC, ketmar wrote:

 that's great: less SJW and other unstable persons.


FYI, I am called am SJW by a lot of people.
Dec 01 2015
parent reply Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQ=?= writes:
On Tuesday, 1 December 2015 at 14:53:10 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:

 On Tuesday, 1 December 2015 at 07:34:49 UTC, ketmar wrote:

 that's great: less SJW and other unstable persons.


 FYI, I am called am SJW by a lot of people.


And that's a good thing!
Dec 01 2015
parent reply Chris <wendlec tcd.ie> writes:
On Tuesday, 1 December 2015 at 14:58:09 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad 
wrote:

 On Tuesday, 1 December 2015 at 14:53:10 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe 
 wrote:

 On Tuesday, 1 December 2015 at 07:34:49 UTC, ketmar wrote:

 that's great: less SJW and other unstable persons.


 FYI, I am called am SJW by a lot of people.


 And that's a good thing!


I don't know, if it's a good thing ;)

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=SJW
Dec 01 2015
next sibling parent reply Adam D. Ruppe <destructionator gmail.com> writes:
On Tuesday, 1 December 2015 at 15:11:53 UTC, Chris wrote:

 I don't know, if it's a good thing ;)


The term itself is fairly silly and it is thrown around quite a 
bit... but my point is just that we shouldn't dismiss people so 
easily, especially when we have an easy fix. If changing a word 
or two will bring us a few more people without costing anything 
else, let's just do it. Not worth arguing over.

Besides, one of those SJWs with a busy schedule could be a genius!
Dec 01 2015
parent Chris <wendlec tcd.ie> writes:
On Tuesday, 1 December 2015 at 15:41:06 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:

 On Tuesday, 1 December 2015 at 15:11:53 UTC, Chris wrote:

 I don't know, if it's a good thing ;)


 The term itself is fairly silly and it is thrown around quite a 
 bit... but my point is just that we shouldn't dismiss people so 
 easily, especially when we have an easy fix. If changing a word 
 or two will bring us a few more people without costing anything 
 else, let's just do it. Not worth arguing over.


I understand, but there will always be SJW or PCW who take 
offence, no matter how careful you are.


 Besides, one of those SJWs with a busy schedule could be a 
 genius!


If they are SJWs according to the definition(s) I linked to 
above, I doubt that you will find a genius among them ;)
Dec 01 2015
prev sibling parent Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQ=?= writes:
On Tuesday, 1 December 2015 at 15:11:53 UTC, Chris wrote:

 I don't know, if it's a good thing ;)

 http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=SJW


Oh well. My interpretation of the term was a lot more 
flattering...
Dec 01 2015
prev sibling next sibling parent Paolo Invernizzi <paolo.invernizzi no.address> writes:
On Tuesday, 1 December 2015 at 07:34:49 UTC, ketmar wrote:

 On Monday, 30 November 2015 at 21:52:34 UTC, Ola Fosheim 
 Grøstad wrote:

 You have 3 seconds to convince a random visitor that the site 
 is worth his/her time. If I am looking for a tool the last 
 thing I want is to try to download something from an emotional 
 boy scouts club.


 that's great: less SJW and other unstable persons. if someone 
 is judging *programming* *language* with 3-second look at the 
 site... well, i'd better not have such person on board.


+1

/P
Dec 01 2015
prev sibling next sibling parent Adam D. Ruppe <destructionator gmail.com> writes:
On Tuesday, 1 December 2015 at 07:34:49 UTC, ketmar wrote:


FYI I pushed your patch to simpledisplay up to github with a few 
minor changes (it didn't compile on Windows).

Gotta do more to it but you might want to pull down so if you do 
more modifications we'll be on the same base.

(i hate that irc is down still, ugh!)
Dec 01 2015
prev sibling parent reply Chris Wright <dhasenan gmail.com> writes:
On Tue, 01 Dec 2015 07:34:48 +0000, ketmar wrote:


 On Monday, 30 November 2015 at 21:52:34 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote:

 You have 3 seconds to convince a random visitor that the site is worth
 his/her time. If I am looking for a tool the last thing I want is to
 try to download something from an emotional boy scouts club.


 that's great: less SJW and other unstable persons. if someone is judging
 *programming* *language* with 3-second look at the site... well, i'd
 better not have such person on board.


The pejorative denotation of the term "SJW", judging by explicit 
definitions, seems to describe something I've never seen. People getting 
offended at everything possible while ignoring social issues -- well, 
okay, the "Happy Holidays" vs "Merry Christmas" wars, but that's a 
typically conservative thing to get worked up about, and the SJW 
stereotype is liberal rather than conservative.

Judging by who is labeled an SJW, I'm one, and mentioning the existence 
of trans people in a context where their existence is relevant is 
sufficient to be labeled an SJW.

As for judging a programming language in three seconds...that's a bad 
analysis of the situation. I left Nim in part because Araq was, shall we 
say, less than friendly. That wasn't the only reason, but it was a 
contributing factor. A poor impression of the community might not suffice 
to drive anyone away, but it can be a factor that, combined with poor 
documentation and poor library support, causes someone to leave.
Dec 01 2015
parent reply Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQ=?= writes:
On Tuesday, 1 December 2015 at 16:18:37 UTC, Chris Wright wrote:

 Judging by who is labeled an SJW, I'm one, and mentioning the 
 existence of trans people in a context where their existence is 
 relevant is sufficient to be labeled an SJW.


Really? That sounds bad, hopefully this will pass. Sounds like 
the trans people are going through the same process as the gays 
did before them. People who have problems with it probably have 
some uncertainty about their own identity at some level.


 As for judging a programming language in three seconds...that's 
 a bad analysis of the situation. I left Nim in part because 
 Araq was, shall we say, less than friendly.


Oh well, but Araq is a mild breeze compared to the D citizens!!! 
There are plenty of people here that like to show off and prefer 
to go through the roof rather than having someone kindly bring 
them back to earth...

But some of us are very reasonable!! Like I decided not to hit 
you back for wrongly claiming that my "O(N)" should have been 
"O(infinity)" and that unqualified "big-oh" usually means 
"average complexity" (when lazy comp sci people use unqualified 
big-oh it always means worst case :-) But since I am going there 
anyway: average complexity analysis isn't something you can do on 
the back of a napkin, first you have to define a model for the 
input, then you have to transform it into something that can be 
dealt with, like a recurrence relation, then an integral that you 
solve analytically etc. So if it common for people around you to 
talk about average complexity analysis a lot then they probably 
have no idea what they are talking about. Average complexity is 
mostly of academic interest (publish or perish!) and insanely 
boring. In fact it is so boring, that the professor who taught 
the topic on my university started the lecture series by saying 
"I am sorry to say this, but this topic is very boring. I wish I 
could say that it will become better as we progress through this 
course, but it won't. It will remain boring throughout."

In the time it takes to do an average analysis of algorithm you 
can implement and benchmark it many times with much more useful 
results. So the next time you meet someone who boasts about their 
average analysis skills... be highly sceptical, they are probably 
bluffing. :^)

I guess this was off topic.
Dec 01 2015
parent reply Chris Wright <dhasenan gmail.com> writes:
On Tue, 01 Dec 2015 17:18:47 +0000, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote:


 On Tuesday, 1 December 2015 at 16:18:37 UTC, Chris Wright wrote:

 Judging by who is labeled an SJW, I'm one, and mentioning the existence
 of trans people in a context where their existence is relevant is
 sufficient to be labeled an SJW.


 
 Really? That sounds bad, hopefully this will pass. Sounds like the trans
 people are going through the same process as the gays did before them.
 People who have problems with it probably have some uncertainty about
 their own identity at some level.


Gay *people*. Not gays.


 As for judging a programming language in three seconds...that's a bad
 analysis of the situation. I left Nim in part because Araq was, shall
 we say, less than friendly.


 
 Oh well, but Araq is a mild breeze compared to the D citizens!!! There
 are plenty of people here that like to show off and prefer to go through
 the roof rather than having someone kindly bring them back to earth...


Araq is the leader of the project. His attitudes weigh much more strongly 
than those of other people in the community.


 But some of us are very reasonable!! Like I decided not to hit you back


Remind me to give you a cookie when you're in town.


 for wrongly claiming that my "O(N)" should have been "O(infinity)"


I believe you claimed O(N) searches would guarantee that the item reached 
the head of the list. His algorithm allowed you not to swap the position 
of the found element. He made this clear -- first he said that the range 
was inclusive, and later he even pointed out that, because it was 
inclusive, it would reduce the number of swaps near the head of the list.

Since it's possible for each search for an item not to result in a swap, 
it is not guaranteed that searching for the same item repeatedly will 
ever move that item to the head of the list.


 and
 that unqualified "big-oh" usually means "average complexity"


Context matters.


 (when lazy
 comp sci people use unqualified big-oh it always means worst case :-)
 But since I am going there anyway: average complexity analysis isn't
 something you can do on the back of a napkin


But doing an average case complexity for exactly one simple case where 
the only random variable is the random number generator is often pretty 
easy. And that's what Andrei did.
Dec 01 2015
parent Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQ=?= writes:
On Tuesday, 1 December 2015 at 17:36:06 UTC, Chris Wright wrote:

 Gay *people*. Not gays.


Oh well, I'm norwegian. I am indifferent to such nuances, I don't 
get the difference :). I think "gay people" in norwegian could be 
offensive too depending on how you phrase it, it could mark 
distance as in "those gay people that are not like us".

I've always just assumed that when Kathy Griffin can yell "ALL MY 
GAYS!" from a stage to applause then it is what one are supposed 
to say.


 Remind me to give you a cookie when you're in town.


I will!


 clear -- first he said that the range was inclusive, and later 
 he even pointed out that, because it was inclusive, it would 
 reduce the number of swaps near the head of the list.


Oh whatever :^), it was sloppy. See below.


 But doing an average case complexity for exactly one simple 
 case where the only random variable is the random number 
 generator is often pretty easy. And that's what Andrei did.


My position is that you cannot assume that you can move from 
there to the average analysis for the algorithm as a whole, but 
since this is such a boring topic, let's let it pass and then we 
can discuss it later when you bring me my cookie! :)
Dec 01 2015
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Adam D. Ruppe <destructionator gmail.com> writes:
I'll change it to "thread" on the front page.
Nov 30 2015
next sibling parent reply Chris <wendlec tcd.ie> writes:
On Monday, 30 November 2015 at 20:07:10 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:

 I'll change it to "thread" on the front page.


I liked this line

"And, the thread many of you have been waiting to hear about... "

Which was exactly how I felt, after reading about the other 
threads :-) This bit of news was more for those who participated 
in the thread (or were crazy enough to read it!), kind of like an 
in-joke. No harm in there.

I was interested in seeing how you (Adam) would sum it up, and I 
have to say you did a pretty good job.
Dec 01 2015
parent Adam D. Ruppe <destructionator gmail.com> writes:
On Tuesday, 1 December 2015 at 10:22:35 UTC, Chris wrote:

 I liked this line

 "And, the thread many of you have been waiting to hear about... 
 "


Yeah, there were a few people who asked me what I was going to 
say on it. (BTW, the D community as I see it, isn't just the 
forums. I also am on the Stack Overflow questions, the IRC 
channel (which is currently down apparently, freenode keeps 
disconnecting me, ugh), sometimes FB/reddit/etc., and there's 
quite a few people who privately email me. And, of course, the 
people I actually talk to regularly are just a small fraction of 
the community as a whole too, and TWID's readership.

Sometimes, we on the forum think we're everybody, but we're 
really just the upper 1% of D's users in terms of activity level. 
We, generally speaking, aren't even the ones who *use* it most, 
just the ones who talk the most.)


But since the impression I got was a lot of people wanted to hear 
about it, I put something up.



So, at the weekly work meeting I talked about in my last post, 
one of the questions the manager always asks is "what can we 
improve", and he usually starts by saying something he felt he 
did wrong this week. Then the floor is open to all of us to 
suggest process changes or whatever to help prevent whatever we 
felt went wrong this week from happening next week.

The goal of this isn't to say "Brian is an idiot", but rather to 
say like "I'd like if Brian chatted a bit more so we know what's 
on his mind because I didn't understand why he made that change 
on Wednesday".

The goal is to get our problems in the open so we can talk about 
fixing it rather than to just hate each other. It is great that 
the manager often starts with a bit of self-criticism because 
that shows that he is open to it too, that we should be free to 
say whatever is on our minds, that it is his responsibility to 
keep things flowing smoothly and it isn't a blame game nor a suck 
up to the boss moment.



My last comment that we need better communication is along those 
same lines. There were a lot of misunderstandings in that thread 
that could be solved with more proactive communication. But, 
also, let's be fair, Andrei is a busy man and can't be seriously 
expected to read every post on every forum. (I didn't know much 
about the SDLang decision either, though I knew it was in for 
some time because I saw support requests come up. But I'm not 
really a dub user personally and don't follow their forums.)

So, we as a community, need to find some good way to distill 
these things to a list of things that might happen that busy 
people can keep up with and discuss before it becomes too big.


I'm trying to provide that with This Week in D, but we can surely 
do better!


tl;dr: as an action item on this, please email me if I forget to 
mention some decision in the Major Changes section. At least we 
can list things there and hopefully see+talk about it before it 
becomes too late.
Dec 01 2015
prev sibling parent CraigDillabaugh <craig.dillabaugh gmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 30 November 2015 at 20:07:10 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:

 I'll change it to "thread" on the front page.


How about "Epic Bikeshedding Thread"?
Dec 01 2015
prev sibling parent =?UTF-8?Q?S=c3=b6nke_Ludwig?= <sludwig outerproduct.org> writes:
Am 30.11.2015 um 13:52 schrieb Ola Fosheim Grøstad:

 This Week in D is a valuable source for information, but it is also on
 the front page and shapes how D is perceived.

 It just doesn't look good or factual when it talks about "flame
 throwing" and "flamewar". I don't think there has been anything that
 warrants that kind of terminology this week. Other weeks, maybe, but
 "flaming" usually refers to prolonged personal attacks.

 Maybe one should reconsider the entertainment aspect of the newsletter
 and stick to factual information that is relevant for the reader.


A slight correction regarding the background: vibe.d doesn't and didn't 
use SDLang at all, just DUB does. It's just that its exploration in the 
context of DUB started quite a while before it became the official 
package manager, but the vibe.d/DUB split happened before the whole 
SDLang topic.
Dec 01 2015