• Walter Bright (4/4) Jan 18 2008 Article: http://www.linux.com/feature/124320
• Bill Baxter (6/13) Jan 18 2008 Note in the comments how someone (not me I promise!) latches on to the
• Jascha Wetzel (6/19) Jan 18 2008 i'm not argumenting against that, but i think it's rather impressive,
• Bill Baxter (8/28) Jan 18 2008 That's a fine argument too. But just saying "it's 4000 lines of code
• Sean Kelly (9/38) Jan 19 2008 std::string and std::vector aren't terribly complex to implement either.
• Jascha Wetzel (13/15) Jan 19 2008 i was exaggerating, it's only 468k ;)
• =?ISO-8859-1?Q?=22J=E9r=F4me_M=2E_Berger=22?= (8/27) Jan 19 2008 And using uSTL? http://ustl.sourceforge.net/
• Jb (5/7) Jan 18 2008 Dunno whether I am imagining this but the discusion comments regarding D...

Walter Bright <newshound1 digitalmars.com> writes:

Article: http://www.linux.com/feature/124320

Reddit: http://programming.reddit.com/info/65uh7/comments/

Digg: 
http://digg.com/programming/D_programming_language_pumps_up_programmer_productivity

Bill Baxter <dnewsgroup billbaxter.com> writes:

Walter Bright wrote:
 Article: http://www.linux.com/feature/124320
 
 Reddit: http://programming.reddit.com/info/65uh7/comments/
 
 Digg: 
 http://digg.com/programming/D_programming_language_pumps_up_pro
rammer_productivity 
 

Note in the comments how someone (not me I promise!) latches on to the 
specious arguments in the FAQ for why strings need to be included as a 
language feature.  Those dubious arguments should be removed.  A better 
argument is that it allows compile-time string manipulation.

--bb

Jascha Wetzel <firstname mainia.de> writes:

Bill Baxter wrote:
 Walter Bright wrote:
 Article: http://www.linux.com/feature/124320

 Reddit: http://programming.reddit.com/info/65uh7/comments/

 Digg: 
 http://digg.com/programming/D_programming_language_pumps_up_pro
rammer_productivity 

 
 Note in the comments how someone (not me I promise!) latches on to the 
 specious arguments in the FAQ for why strings need to be included as a 
 language feature.  Those dubious arguments should be removed.  A better 
 argument is that it allows compile-time string manipulation.

i'm not argumenting against that, but i think it's rather impressive, 
that the mere inclusion of std::string and std::vector bloats a single 
c++ file to >480kb after preprocessing. considering the simple and 
fundamental nature of these things, that is already bad enough for me to 
want built-in dynamic arrays and strings.

Bill Baxter <dnewsgroup billbaxter.com> writes:

Jascha Wetzel wrote:
 Bill Baxter wrote:
 Walter Bright wrote:
 Article: http://www.linux.com/feature/124320

 Reddit: http://programming.reddit.com/info/65uh7/comments/

 Digg: 
 http://digg.com/programming/D_programming_language_pumps_up_pro
rammer_productivity 

 Note in the comments how someone (not me I promise!) latches on to the 
 specious arguments in the FAQ for why strings need to be included as a 
 language feature.  Those dubious arguments should be removed.  A 
 better argument is that it allows compile-time string manipulation.

 
 i'm not argumenting against that, but i think it's rather impressive, 
 that the mere inclusion of std::string and std::vector bloats a single 
 c++ file to >480kb after preprocessing. considering the simple and 
 fundamental nature of these things, that is already bad enough for me to 
 want built-in dynamic arrays and strings.

That's a fine argument too.  But just saying "it's 4000 lines of code 
therefore it must be buggy" is weak, considering the amount of testing 
std::string and std::vector get and the amount of resources poured into 
providing STL implementations.  I'd be much more likely to believe 100 
lines of D compiler source code is buggy than 4000 lines of a mainstream 
STL, simply because the STL has had *orders of magnitude* more use than DMD.

--bb

Sean Kelly <sean f4.ca> writes:

Bill Baxter wrote:
 Jascha Wetzel wrote:
 Bill Baxter wrote:
 Walter Bright wrote:
 Article: http://www.linux.com/feature/124320

 Reddit: http://programming.reddit.com/info/65uh7/comments/

 Digg:
 http://digg.com/programming/D_programming_language_pumps_up_programmer_productivity

 Note in the comments how someone (not me I promise!) latches on to
 the specious arguments in the FAQ for why strings need to be included
 as a language feature.  Those dubious arguments should be removed.  A
 better argument is that it allows compile-time string manipulation.

 i'm not argumenting against that, but i think it's rather impressive,
 that the mere inclusion of std::string and std::vector bloats a single
 c++ file to >480kb after preprocessing. considering the simple and
 fundamental nature of these things, that is already bad enough for me
 to want built-in dynamic arrays and strings.

 
 That's a fine argument too.  But just saying "it's 4000 lines of code
 therefore it must be buggy" is weak, considering the amount of testing
 std::string and std::vector get and the amount of resources poured into
 providing STL implementations.  I'd be much more likely to believe 100
 lines of D compiler source code is buggy than 4000 lines of a mainstream
 STL, simply because the STL has had *orders of magnitude* more use than
 DMD.

std::string and std::vector aren't terribly complex to implement either.
 In my experience, the only real sticking point in implementing STL
containers is having to use STL allocators, which makes the code a bit
more complex/weird than it would be otherwise.  But this is really only
an issue once, since the same technique applies to all containers.

That said, 480k is a pretty big deal for something so fundamental.  The
entire D runtime occupies around 70k.


Sean

Jascha Wetzel <firstname mainia.de> writes:

Sean Kelly wrote:
 That said, 480k is a pretty big deal for something so fundamental.  The
 entire D runtime occupies around 70k.

i was exaggerating, it's only 468k ;)

-----bloat.cc------
#include <string>
#include <vector>

int main()
{
}
-------------------

g++ -E bloat.cc -o bloat_pre.cc
ls -l
-rw-r--r--  1 jascha jascha     52 2008-01-19 18:09 bloat.cc
-rw-r--r--  1 jascha jascha 479498 2008-01-19 18:09 bloat_pre.cc

=?ISO-8859-1?Q?=22J=E9r=F4me_M=2E_Berger=22?= <jeberger free.fr> writes:

Jascha Wetzel wrote:
 Sean Kelly wrote:
 That said, 480k is a pretty big deal for something so fundamental.  The
 entire D runtime occupies around 70k.

 
 i was exaggerating, it's only 468k ;)
 
 -----bloat.cc------
 #include <string>
 #include <vector>
 
 int main()
 {
 }
 -------------------
 
 g++ -E bloat.cc -o bloat_pre.cc
 ls -l
 -rw-r--r--  1 jascha jascha     52 2008-01-19 18:09 bloat.cc
 -rw-r--r--  1 jascha jascha 479498 2008-01-19 18:09 bloat_pre.cc

	And using uSTL? http://ustl.sourceforge.net/

		Jerome
-- 
+------------------------- Jerome M. BERGER ---------------------+
|    mailto:jeberger free.fr      | ICQ:    238062172            |
|    http://jeberger.free.fr/     | Jabber: jeberger jabber.fr   |
+---------------------------------+------------------------------+

"Jb" <jb nowhere.com> writes:

"Walter Bright" <newshound1 digitalmars.com> wrote in message 
news:fmpqf1$1skg$1 digitalmars.com...
 Article: http://www.linux.com/feature/124320

 Reddit: http://programming.reddit.com/info/65uh7/comments/

Dunno whether I am imagining this but the discusion comments regarding D 
seem to be more positive these days. There also seems to be more people who 
have actualy tried D replying.