digitalmars.D - World needs a safe language
- Independent (9/9) Apr 09 2021 World needs a safe language statically typed language without GC
- evilrat (7/16) Apr 09 2021 Just don't use it if you hate it so much.
- Independent (5/5) Apr 10 2021 Sorry I dont hate, instead I have lot of respect for the
- Dylan Graham (9/14) Apr 10 2021 I'm kind of torn on this.
- Paulo Pinto (23/37) Apr 11 2021 Here are some ideas,
- Dylan Graham (7/32) Apr 11 2021 I think you misunderstand my position. The comment you replied to
- Paulo Pinto (5/13) Apr 11 2021 I was kind of agreeing with you, the goal needs to be to improve
- Dylan Graham (11/26) Apr 11 2021 My apologies, I misinterpreted what you were saying. I agree. D
- Imperatorn (3/11) Apr 11 2021 I really appreciate the work you've doing for getting D to
- Imperatorn (2/8) Apr 11 2021 +1
- Imperatorn (6/15) Apr 10 2021 If we got seamless reuse of existing c++ or translation to D,
- evilrat (5/10) Apr 10 2021 Oh I've seen you on github gentool discussion, actually you can
- Imperatorn (2/14) Apr 10 2021 Yeah, I haven't really tried it yet. Will do in the coming week 🍀
- Paulo Pinto (17/26) Apr 10 2021 Here is C# beating C++ on gRPC parsing, because .NET team started
- aberba (2/7) Apr 10 2021 Why do I agree with you this much? 🤔
- Dylan Graham (2/11) Apr 10 2021 If you want absolute safety, just use Rust. Let D be D.
- Max Haughton (2/13) Apr 10 2021 Why should D be unsafe?
- Dylan Graham (13/27) Apr 10 2021 The only premise OP has offered is Rust but simpler(TM). I'm not
World needs a safe language statically typed language without GC but simpler than rust. D's biggest win against rust is that it has much better interop than rust with C++. If we make D a no GC,safe language it can easily beat rust. GC can be optional. No company wants to rip and replace existing c++ code. Why would some want to use D since go with GC is already there which is backed by a big corp. Their marketing made GC good. However good D is compared to Go, its hard to suceed with GC. This is just my opinion. well wisher.
Apr 09 2021
On Friday, 9 April 2021 at 21:37:51 UTC, Independent wrote:World needs a safe language statically typed language without GC but simpler than rust. D's biggest win against rust is that it has much better interop than rust with C++. If we make D a no GC,safe language it can easily beat rust. GC can be optional. No company wants to rip and replace existing c++ code. Why would some want to use D since go with GC is already there which is backed by a big corp. Their marketing made GC good. However good D is compared to Go, its hard to suceed with GC. This is just my opinion. well wisher.Just don't use it if you hate it so much. Compilers provided you with tools to track implicit GC runs(dmd -vgc, ldc -nogc flags), use RAII or whatever for memory allocations, make your own containers that handles its memory or find existing one on dub. Done. No need to waste time and money inventing what's already there.
Apr 09 2021
Sorry I dont hate, instead I have lot of respect for the community. I was just sharing my thoughts. I wish D gets more success in the future. What I felt is that D needs a plan, roadmoap, goal and shout it outside to the world and the community can help in small pieces. It needs a small makeover.
Apr 10 2021
On Saturday, 10 April 2021 at 20:04:03 UTC, Independent wrote:Sorry I dont hate, instead I have lot of respect for the community. I was just sharing my thoughts. I wish D gets more success in the future. What I felt is that D needs a plan, roadmoap, goal and shout it outside to the world and the community can help in small pieces. It needs a small makeover.I'm kind of torn on this. I'm not sure that anyone really has a long term vision of what D will be. It's becoming quite a different language from even 10 years ago. It is quite affirming to hear someone say "this is what X will be in 5 years". At the same time, D's evolution does feel a bit more organic, as contributors commit things they feel is beneficial for the language in a decentralised manner.
Apr 10 2021
On Saturday, 10 April 2021 at 23:25:40 UTC, Dylan Graham wrote:On Saturday, 10 April 2021 at 20:04:03 UTC, Independent wrote:Here are some ideas, Meadow Platform, a µRTOS and full .NET Standard compatible runtime. https://www.wildernesslabs.co/developers Had it been in D, there would be no need for the µRTOS, everything would be in D. microEJ, a µRTOS and Java based runtime. https://www.microej.com/ Also a nice candidate for D. Unity, now the must go engine for anyone that wants to do game dev, AR and VR without having to deal with C++ as much as possible. nogc. F-Secure decided Go is good enough for bare metal coding, so USB Armory with TamaGo unikernel was born, yet another use case where D would have shinned. https://www.f-secure.com/en/consulting/foundry/usb-armory Discussing if D would be better with or without GC is pointless, rather improving the already existing language, so that companies like the examples above can look at D and place it on their candidate list for final decision how to build their products.Sorry I dont hate, instead I have lot of respect for the community. I was just sharing my thoughts. I wish D gets more success in the future. What I felt is that D needs a plan, roadmoap, goal and shout it outside to the world and the community can help in small pieces. It needs a small makeover.I'm kind of torn on this. I'm not sure that anyone really has a long term vision of what D will be. It's becoming quite a different language from even 10 years ago. It is quite affirming to hear someone say "this is what X will be in 5 years". At the same time, D's evolution does feel a bit more organic, as contributors commit things they feel is beneficial for the language in a decentralised manner.
Apr 11 2021
On Sunday, 11 April 2021 at 09:29:35 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:On Saturday, 10 April 2021 at 23:25:40 UTC, Dylan Graham wrote:I think you misunderstand my position. The comment you replied to was me discussing D's leadership/outlook style. In my comment above that, I did mention exactly what you are doing. LWDR is my attempt to make full D accessible in the embedded world. I am trying to improve D in a sector that I personally prioritise.[...]Here are some ideas, Meadow Platform, a µRTOS and full .NET Standard compatible runtime. https://www.wildernesslabs.co/developers Had it been in D, there would be no need for the µRTOS, everything would be in D. microEJ, a µRTOS and Java based runtime. https://www.microej.com/ Also a nice candidate for D. Unity, now the must go engine for anyone that wants to do game dev, AR and VR without having to deal with C++ as much as possible. with nogc. F-Secure decided Go is good enough for bare metal coding, so USB Armory with TamaGo unikernel was born, yet another use case where D would have shinned. https://www.f-secure.com/en/consulting/foundry/usb-armory Discussing if D would be better with or without GC is pointless, rather improving the already existing language, so that companies like the examples above can look at D and place it on their candidate list for final decision how to build their products.
Apr 11 2021
On Sunday, 11 April 2021 at 09:47:15 UTC, Dylan Graham wrote:On Sunday, 11 April 2021 at 09:29:35 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:I was kind of agreeing with you, the goal needs to be to improve existing features, trying to sell it to the GC haters crowd is worthless effort, they will just come up with the next reason why D isn't suitable for them.[...]I think you misunderstand my position. The comment you replied to was me discussing D's leadership/outlook style. In my comment above that, I did mention exactly what you are doing. LWDR is my attempt to make full D accessible in the embedded world. I am trying to improve D in a sector that I personally prioritise.
Apr 11 2021
Dylan Graham <dylan.graham2000 gmail.com> On Sunday, 11 April 2021 at 10:10:02 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:On Sunday, 11 April 2021 at 09:47:15 UTC, Dylan Graham wrote:My apologies, I misinterpreted what you were saying. I agree. D has made many efforts to reduce it's GC dependency and there are packages to help bridge the gaps the language can't. Alas, there is still a lot of die-hard anti-GC folk. Honestly, I kinda of like the simplicity of D's GC. I know why it's going to run, when it's going to run and what it will do. In tight situations where I don't want the GC, it's super easy to avoid. D currently has a tremendous amount of flexibility, I can develop fast where I want and blazing performance where I want. I feel like D's flexibility is criminally undervalued.On Sunday, 11 April 2021 at 09:29:35 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:I was kind of agreeing with you, the goal needs to be to improve existing features, trying to sell it to the GC haters crowd is worthless effort, they will just come up with the next reason why D isn't suitable for them.[...]I think you misunderstand my position. The comment you replied to was me discussing D's leadership/outlook style. In my comment above that, I did mention exactly what you are doing. LWDR is my attempt to make full D accessible in the embedded world. I am trying to improve D in a sector that I personally prioritise.
Apr 11 2021
On Sunday, 11 April 2021 at 09:47:15 UTC, Dylan Graham wrote:On Sunday, 11 April 2021 at 09:29:35 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:I really appreciate the work you've doing for getting D to embedded. It's one of the last pieces for us/me to adopt D 100%[...]I think you misunderstand my position. The comment you replied to was me discussing D's leadership/outlook style. In my comment above that, I did mention exactly what you are doing. LWDR is my attempt to make full D accessible in the embedded world. I am trying to improve D in a sector that I personally prioritise.
Apr 11 2021
On Sunday, 11 April 2021 at 09:29:35 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:On Saturday, 10 April 2021 at 23:25:40 UTC, Dylan Graham wrote:+1[...]Here are some ideas, Meadow Platform, a µRTOS and full .NET Standard compatible runtime. [...]
Apr 11 2021
On Friday, 9 April 2021 at 21:37:51 UTC, Independent wrote:World needs a safe language statically typed language without GC but simpler than rust. D's biggest win against rust is that it has much better interop than rust with C++. If we make D a no GC,safe language it can easily beat rust. GC can be optional. No company wants to rip and replace existing c++ code. Why would some want to use D since go with GC is already there which is backed by a big corp. Their marketing made GC good. However good D is compared to Go, its hard to suceed with GC. This is just my opinion. well wisher.If we got seamless reuse of existing c++ or translation to D, that would be the big thing imo. Actually, if the porting process could be improved/highly automated that would probably be the biggest win since then you'd have D all the way = nirvana.
Apr 10 2021
On Saturday, 10 April 2021 at 07:07:19 UTC, Imperatorn wrote:If we got seamless reuse of existing c++ or translation to D, that would be the big thing imo. Actually, if the porting process could be improved/highly automated that would probably be the biggest win since then you'd have D all the way = nirvana.Oh I've seen you on github gentool discussion, actually you can try to convert C++ code using gentool by adding .cpp to sources list, it is not restricted to headers and might work for standalone libraries that doesn't rely on STL too much.
Apr 10 2021
On Saturday, 10 April 2021 at 09:20:27 UTC, evilrat wrote:On Saturday, 10 April 2021 at 07:07:19 UTC, Imperatorn wrote:Yeah, I haven't really tried it yet. Will do in the coming week 🍀If we got seamless reuse of existing c++ or translation to D, that would be the big thing imo. Actually, if the porting process could be improved/highly automated that would probably be the biggest win since then you'd have D all the way = nirvana.Oh I've seen you on github gentool discussion, actually you can try to convert C++ code using gentool by adding .cpp to sources list, it is not restricted to headers and might work for standalone libraries that doesn't rely on STL too much.
Apr 10 2021
On Friday, 9 April 2021 at 21:37:51 UTC, Independent wrote:World needs a safe language statically typed language without GC but simpler than rust. D's biggest win against rust is that it has much better interop than rust with C++. If we make D a no GC,safe language it can easily beat rust. GC can be optional. No company wants to rip and replace existing c++ code. Why would some want to use D since go with GC is already there which is backed by a big corp. Their marketing made GC good. However good D is compared to Go, its hard to suceed with GC. This is just my opinion. well wisher.to be more serious about their optimisation efforts, https://devblogs.microsoft.com/aspnet/grpc-performance-improvements-in-net-5/ Not only that, they started to port runtime code from C++ into https://devblogs.microsoft.com/dotnet/announcing-net-6-preview-3/ Unity keeps their effort to migrate core engine code from C++ nogc, while leaving the remaining part of the engine to regular What D needs is fixing bugs, finishing some language feature and be the best at its thing. Doing a D vs Rust vs C++ feature check list, won't go anywhere, mainstream languages get picked due to ecosystems and OS SDKs, not due to whatever language feature makes to the frontage of hacker news.
Apr 10 2021
On Saturday, 10 April 2021 at 08:06:15 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:On Friday, 9 April 2021 at 21:37:51 UTC, Independent wrote:Why do I agree with you this much? 🤔[...]started to be more serious about their optimisation efforts, [...]
Apr 10 2021
On Friday, 9 April 2021 at 21:37:51 UTC, Independent wrote:World needs a safe language statically typed language without GC but simpler than rust. D's biggest win against rust is that it has much better interop than rust with C++. If we make D a no GC,safe language it can easily beat rust. GC can be optional. No company wants to rip and replace existing c++ code. Why would some want to use D since go with GC is already there which is backed by a big corp. Their marketing made GC good. However good D is compared to Go, its hard to suceed with GC. This is just my opinion. well wisher.If you want absolute safety, just use Rust. Let D be D.
Apr 10 2021
On Saturday, 10 April 2021 at 15:50:51 UTC, Dylan Graham wrote:On Friday, 9 April 2021 at 21:37:51 UTC, Independent wrote:Why should D be unsafe?World needs a safe language statically typed language without GC but simpler than rust. D's biggest win against rust is that it has much better interop than rust with C++. If we make D a no GC,safe language it can easily beat rust. GC can be optional. No company wants to rip and replace existing c++ code. Why would some want to use D since go with GC is already there which is backed by a big corp. Their marketing made GC good. However good D is compared to Go, its hard to suceed with GC. This is just my opinion. well wisher.If you want absolute safety, just use Rust. Let D be D.
Apr 10 2021
On Saturday, 10 April 2021 at 18:57:39 UTC, Max Haughton wrote:On Saturday, 10 April 2021 at 15:50:51 UTC, Dylan Graham wrote:The only premise OP has offered is Rust but simpler(TM). I'm not saying D should be unsafe, but coming in with the basis of Rust but simpler(TM) and no explanation what that means or how to achieve it, then yeah, it's an open ended moot point. Especially after saying no one wants to use D with GC (so I assume D's metaprogramming, UCFS, contract programming, etc means nothing) because Go exists and then says D should be like Rust, when Rust exists. D is a community project. If you want it to change, write a DIP, commit some code or donate. I want D to be better in the embedded world, so I've been writing a suitable runtime and I've donated to the foundation.On Friday, 9 April 2021 at 21:37:51 UTC, Independent wrote:Why should D be unsafe?World needs a safe language statically typed language without GC but simpler than rust. D's biggest win against rust is that it has much better interop than rust with C++. If we make D a no GC,safe language it can easily beat rust. GC can be optional. No company wants to rip and replace existing c++ code. Why would some want to use D since go with GC is already there which is backed by a big corp. Their marketing made GC good. However good D is compared to Go, its hard to suceed with GC. This is just my opinion. well wisher.If you want absolute safety, just use Rust. Let D be D.
Apr 10 2021