www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D - Wishlist/Roadmap for 2.0?

reply Tristam MacDonald <swiftcoder gmail.com> writes:
Is anyone currently running, or has thought about running, a tentative roadmap
for D 2.0? Or a polled wishlist of some sort to give the Developers string
feedback on what sort of issues the general D community would like to see?

I don't have any complaints about the way D is developed, and Walter is doing
an incredible job seeing as he is doing it alone. But I do sometimes wonder if
the development priorities as they seem to be are very beneficial, for
instance, I have a feeling that CTFE is less useful to the general developer
than say meaningful constructors/destructors/opAssign on structs.

Again, I am not complaining, merely suggesting a way to get balanced feedback
on what is most important to the community in general...
Jun 19 2007
next sibling parent reply Knud Soerensen <4tuu4k002 sneakemail.com> writes:
There is an unofficial wish list at

http://all-technology.com/eigenpolls/dwishlist/story.php
http://all-technology.com/eigenpolls/dwishlist/

On Tue, 19 Jun 2007 10:25:46 -0400, Tristam MacDonald wrote:


 Is anyone currently running, or has thought about running, a tentative
 roadmap for D 2.0? Or a polled wishlist of some sort to give the
 Developers string feedback on what sort of issues the general D
 community would like to see?
 
 I don't have any complaints about the way D is developed, and Walter is
 doing an incredible job seeing as he is doing it alone. But I do
 sometimes wonder if the development priorities as they seem to be are
 very beneficial, for instance, I have a feeling that CTFE is less useful
 to the general developer than say meaningful
 constructors/destructors/opAssign on structs.
 
 Again, I am not complaining, merely suggesting a way to get balanced
 feedback on what is most important to the community in general...
Jun 19 2007
parent reply "Stewart Gordon" <smjg_1998 yahoo.com> writes:
"Knud Soerensen" <4tuu4k002 sneakemail.com> wrote in message 
news:f594pa$8rr$1 digitalmars.com...

 There is an unofficial wish list at

 http://all-technology.com/eigenpolls/dwishlist/story.php
 http://all-technology.com/eigenpolls/dwishlist/


<snip top of upside-down reply>

And there is _the_ unofficial wish list (isn't that a contradiction in 
terms?) at

http://www.prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?FeatureRequestList

Stewart.
Jun 29 2007
parent Pragma <ericanderton yahoo.removeme.com> writes:
Stewart Gordon wrote:

 
 And there is _the_ unofficial wish list (isn't that a contradiction in 
 terms?)


Yes, although it could be worse: you /could/ re-name it using some dangling
participles:

"The one-and-only unofficial beta D2.0 wishlist"

-- 
- EricAnderton at yahoo
Jul 03 2007
prev sibling parent reply Graham St Jack <grahams acres.com.au> writes:
Tristam MacDonald wrote:

 Is anyone currently running, or has thought about running, a tentative roadmap
for D 2.0? Or a polled wishlist of some sort to give the Developers string
feedback on what sort of issues the general D community would like to see?
 
 I don't have any complaints about the way D is developed, and Walter is doing
an incredible job seeing as he is doing it alone. But I do sometimes wonder if
the development priorities as they seem to be are very beneficial, for
instance, I have a feeling that CTFE is less useful to the general developer
than say meaningful constructors/destructors/opAssign on structs.
 
 Again, I am not complaining, merely suggesting a way to get balanced feedback
on what is most important to the community in general...


First I have to say that (especially with the addition of const stuff) D 
is already fantastic, and we have to be careful not to compromise it 
with too much feature bloat.


That said, the things I would like to see added for 2.x are:

Multiple return values (tuples).

Adding pthread-like conditions into the language, using the same mutex 
as the synchronized keyword. It needs to be done in a way that allows 
any number of conditions per object, rather than Java's 0 or 1.

A way to keep track of what exceptions are thrown, similar to the way 
Java does it (perhaps optional via a compiler switch?).
Jun 19 2007
parent Tristam MacDonald <swiftcoder gmail.com> writes:
Graham St Jack Wrote:


 Tristam MacDonald wrote:

 Is anyone currently running, or has thought about running, a tentative roadmap
for D 2.0? Or a polled wishlist of some sort to give the Developers string
feedback on what sort of issues the general D community would like to see?
 
 I don't have any complaints about the way D is developed, and Walter is doing
an incredible job seeing as he is doing it alone. But I do sometimes wonder if
the development priorities as they seem to be are very beneficial, for
instance, I have a feeling that CTFE is less useful to the general developer
than say meaningful constructors/destructors/opAssign on structs.
 
 Again, I am not complaining, merely suggesting a way to get balanced feedback
on what is most important to the community in general...


 
 First I have to say that (especially with the addition of const stuff) D 
 is already fantastic, and we have to be careful not to compromise it 
 with too much feature bloat.
 
 
 That said, the things I would like to see added for 2.x are:
 
 Multiple return values (tuples).
 
 Adding pthread-like conditions into the language, using the same mutex 
 as the synchronized keyword. It needs to be done in a way that allows 
 any number of conditions per object, rather than Java's 0 or 1.
 
 A way to keep track of what exceptions are thrown, similar to the way 
 Java does it (perhaps optional via a compiler switch?).
 


While we are on the topic of exceptions, better debugger support would be very
welcome. I know it is not directly part of the language, but just being able to
get line numbers and file names out of GDB would be a huge help. The compiler
is already much more helpful on errors than common C++ compilers, but runtime
errors are a little hard to diagnose when you are digging through x86 assembly
trying to correlate with the D source code...
Jun 19 2007