• Walter Bright (2/2) Dec 06 2007 Andrei has announced on his web site http://erdani.org/ that he's
• Gregor Richards (4/7) Dec 06 2007 It's been out for nearly a decade and I still haven't bought it! I need
• Craig Black (3/9) Dec 06 2007 Andrei is even smarter than I thought!
• Jarrett Billingsley (7/19) Dec 06 2007 It really is an amazing idea! By writing a book and then releasing it t...
• Walter Bright (3/10) Dec 06 2007 Aggh! I should proofread my own posts!
• Bill Baxter (4/15) Dec 06 2007 Aggh! I should read all the responses before I point out the same
• Jan Claeys (4/5) Dec 08 2007 Or you could try to borrow Guido's legendary time machine... ;-)
• Carlos Santander (4/7) Dec 06 2007 Err... 2008.
• Clay Smith (2/5) Dec 06 2007 Nice! Two D books in 2 days. :)
• Bill Baxter (4/9) Dec 06 2007 Indeed.
• Denton Cockburn (6/9) Dec 06 2007 With a release date of a year away, I'm guessing he'll be putting forwar...
• Walter Bright (2/14) Dec 06 2007 The idea is that the book will represent D 2.0.
• eao197 (7/19) Dec 06 2007 Could we expect that D 2.0 will be stable enough at Oct 2008 and there
• Robert Fraser (6/26) Dec 06 2007 I hope it isn't.
• Denton Cockburn (6/34) Dec 07 2007 While true and agreeable, we do need a point at which D should be stable...
• eao197 (16/42) Dec 07 2007 I don't want to start a new wave of this holy war. It is need to clarify...
• Walter Bright (2/8) Dec 07 2007 We'll just start on D 3.0 then.
• Craig Black (8/16) Dec 07 2007 I would hope that when D 2.0 features have been completed, that some tim...
• Walter Bright (3/6) Dec 07 2007 It's far too early to make plans, but I expect 3.0 would be a push to
• Charles D Hixson (8/14) Dec 07 2007 How about a run-time interpretive layer, or a good graphics
• Craig Black (4/9) Dec 07 2007 I was under the impression that transactional memory would be included i...
• Walter Bright (2/4) Dec 07 2007 Too soon to tell.
• David Wilson (9/19) Dec 09 2007 It seems to me, D being a pragmatic language targeting realistic
• Robert Fraser (2/7) Dec 09 2007 IMO, the syntax Bartoz presented at the conference was fine.
• Walter Bright (2/7) Dec 07 2007 Yes.

Walter Bright <newshound1 digitalmars.com> writes:

Andrei has announced on his web site http://erdani.org/ that he's 
working on the book "The D Programming Language" due out in October of 1998.

Gregor Richards <Richards codu.org> writes:

Walter Bright wrote:
 Andrei has announced on his web site http://erdani.org/ that he's 
 working on the book "The D Programming Language" due out in October of 
 1998.

It's been out for nearly a decade and I still haven't bought it! I need 
to get with the program!

  - Gregor Richards

"Craig Black" <cblack ara.com> writes:

"Gregor Richards" <Richards codu.org> wrote in message 
news:fj9mpv$1kjt$1 digitalmars.com...
 Walter Bright wrote:
 Andrei has announced on his web site http://erdani.org/ that he's working 
 on the book "The D Programming Language" due out in October of 1998.

 It's been out for nearly a decade and I still haven't bought it! I need to 
 get with the program!

  - Gregor Richards

Andrei is even smarter than I thought! 

"Jarrett Billingsley" <kb3ctd2 yahoo.com> writes:

"Craig Black" <cblack ara.com> wrote in message 
news:fj9mvi$1l4a$1 digitalmars.com...
 "Gregor Richards" <Richards codu.org> wrote in message 
 news:fj9mpv$1kjt$1 digitalmars.com...
 Walter Bright wrote:
 Andrei has announced on his web site http://erdani.org/ that he's 
 working on the book "The D Programming Language" due out in October of 
 1998.

 It's been out for nearly a decade and I still haven't bought it! I need 
 to get with the program!

  - Gregor Richards

 Andrei is even smarter than I thought!

It really is an amazing idea!  By writing a book and then releasing it ten 
years ago, he'll inspire Walter to write an implementation of the language, 
changing the past and making D1 come out years sooner.

Or maybe this book is what inspired Walter in the first place, and Andrei 
just has to write the book to complete the time loop. 

Walter Bright <newshound1 digitalmars.com> writes:

Gregor Richards wrote:
 Walter Bright wrote:
 Andrei has announced on his web site http://erdani.org/ that he's 
 working on the book "The D Programming Language" due out in October of 
 1998.


  ^^2008^^
 
 It's been out for nearly a decade and I still haven't bought it! I need 
 to get with the program!

Aggh! I should proofread my own posts!

Bill Baxter <dnewsgroup billbaxter.com> writes:

Walter Bright wrote:
 Gregor Richards wrote:
 Walter Bright wrote:
 Andrei has announced on his web site http://erdani.org/ that he's 
 working on the book "The D Programming Language" due out in October 
 of 1998.


  ^^2008^^
 It's been out for nearly a decade and I still haven't bought it! I 
 need to get with the program!

 
 Aggh! I should proofread my own posts!


Aggh! I should read all the responses before I point out the same 
mistake as 5 other people!

--bb

Jan Claeys <digitalmars janc.be> writes:

Op Thu, 06 Dec 2007 12:58:31 -0800, schreef Walter Bright:

 Aggh! I should proofread my own posts!

Or you could try to borrow Guido's legendary time machine...  ;-)


-- 
JanC

Carlos Santander <csantander619 gmail.com> writes:

Walter Bright escribió:
 Andrei has announced on his web site http://erdani.org/ that he's 
 working on the book "The D Programming Language" due out in October of 
 1998.

Err... 2008.

-- 
Carlos Santander Bernal

Clay Smith <clayasaurus gmail.com> writes:

Walter Bright wrote:
 Andrei has announced on his web site http://erdani.org/ that he's 
 working on the book "The D Programming Language" due out in October of 
 1998.

Nice! Two D books in 2 days. :)

Bill Baxter <dnewsgroup billbaxter.com> writes:

Clay Smith wrote:
 Walter Bright wrote:
 Andrei has announced on his web site http://erdani.org/ that he's 
 working on the book "The D Programming Language" due out in October of 
 1998.


I think you mean 2008? ;-)

 Nice! Two D books in 2 days. :)

Indeed.

--bb

Denton Cockburn <diboss hotmail.com> writes:

On Thu, 06 Dec 2007 12:35:41 -0800, Walter Bright wrote:

 Andrei has announced on his web site http://erdani.org/ that he's
 working on the book "The D Programming Language" due out in October of
 1998.

With a release date of a year away, I'm guessing he'll be putting forward 
the new things in D 2.0?

These two books will be really good for D.
Now the D-volution begins. (That still makes sense, you're remaking C++ 
properly)

Walter Bright <newshound1 digitalmars.com> writes:

Denton Cockburn wrote:
 On Thu, 06 Dec 2007 12:35:41 -0800, Walter Bright wrote:
 
 Andrei has announced on his web site http://erdani.org/ that he's
 working on the book "The D Programming Language" due out in October of
 1998.

 
 With a release date of a year away, I'm guessing he'll be putting forward 
 the new things in D 2.0?
 
 These two books will be really good for D.
 Now the D-volution begins. (That still makes sense, you're remaking C++ 
 properly)

The idea is that the book will represent D 2.0.

eao197 <eao197 intervale.ru> writes:

On Fri, 07 Dec 2007 04:48:40 +0300, Walter Bright  
<newshound1 digitalmars.com> wrote:

 Denton Cockburn wrote:
 On Thu, 06 Dec 2007 12:35:41 -0800, Walter Bright wrote:

 Andrei has announced on his web site http://erdani.org/ that he's
 working on the book "The D Programming Language" due out in October of
 1998.

  With a release date of a year away, I'm guessing he'll be putting  
 forward the new things in D 2.0?
  These two books will be really good for D.
 Now the D-volution begins. (That still makes sense, you're remaking C++  
 properly)

 The idea is that the book will represent D 2.0.

Could we expect that D 2.0 will be stable enough at Oct 2008 and there  
won't be new compatibility-breaking changes in the language?

-- 
Regards,
Yauheni Akhotnikau

Robert Fraser <fraserofthenight gmail.com> writes:

eao197 wrote:
 On Fri, 07 Dec 2007 04:48:40 +0300, Walter Bright 
 <newshound1 digitalmars.com> wrote:
 
 Denton Cockburn wrote:
 On Thu, 06 Dec 2007 12:35:41 -0800, Walter Bright wrote:

 Andrei has announced on his web site http://erdani.org/ that he's
 working on the book "The D Programming Language" due out in October of
 1998.

  With a release date of a year away, I'm guessing he'll be putting 
 forward the new things in D 2.0?
  These two books will be really good for D.
 Now the D-volution begins. (That still makes sense, you're remaking 
 C++ properly)

 The idea is that the book will represent D 2.0.

 
 Could we expect that D 2.0 will be stable enough at Oct 2008 and there 
 won't be new compatibility-breaking changes in the language?
 

I hope it isn't.

I like the fact that D is constantly evolving. Certainly, there's a bit 
of feature creep here & there, but overall it gives the feeling that D 
is certainly bridging the gap between programming paradigms and 
presenting itself as a modern language.

Denton Cockburn <diboss hotmail.com> writes:

On Thu, 06 Dec 2007 22:22:10 -0800, Robert Fraser wrote:

 eao197 wrote:
 On Fri, 07 Dec 2007 04:48:40 +0300, Walter Bright
 <newshound1 digitalmars.com> wrote:
 
 Denton Cockburn wrote:
 On Thu, 06 Dec 2007 12:35:41 -0800, Walter Bright wrote:

 Andrei has announced on his web site http://erdani.org/ that he's
 working on the book "The D Programming Language" due out in October
 of 1998.

  With a release date of a year away, I'm guessing he'll be putting
 forward the new things in D 2.0?
  These two books will be really good for D.
 Now the D-volution begins. (That still makes sense, you're remaking
 C++ properly)

 The idea is that the book will represent D 2.0.

 
 Could we expect that D 2.0 will be stable enough at Oct 2008 and there
 won't be new compatibility-breaking changes in the language?
 
 

 I hope it isn't.
 
 I like the fact that D is constantly evolving. Certainly, there's a bit
 of feature creep here & there, but overall it gives the feeling that D
 is certainly bridging the gap between programming paradigms and
 presenting itself as a modern language.

While true and agreeable, we do need a point at which D should be stable 
enough to have another official release (2.0).

Then the new development branch can be 3.0

Thinking about it though, it is kinda weird to have 2.0 come out after 
having worked with 2.00(1-8).

eao197 <eao197 intervale.ru> writes:

On Fri, 07 Dec 2007 09:22:10 +0300, Robert Fraser  
<fraserofthenight gmail.com> wrote:

 eao197 wrote:
 On Fri, 07 Dec 2007 04:48:40 +0300, Walter Bright  
 <newshound1 digitalmars.com> wrote:

 Denton Cockburn wrote:
 On Thu, 06 Dec 2007 12:35:41 -0800, Walter Bright wrote:

 Andrei has announced on his web site http://erdani.org/ that he's
 working on the book "The D Programming Language" due out in October  
 of
 1998.

  With a release date of a year away, I'm guessing he'll be putting  
 forward the new things in D 2.0?
  These two books will be really good for D.
 Now the D-volution begins. (That still makes sense, you're remaking  
 C++ properly)

 The idea is that the book will represent D 2.0.

  Could we expect that D 2.0 will be stable enough at Oct 2008 and there  
 won't be new compatibility-breaking changes in the language?

 I hope it isn't.

 I like the fact that D is constantly evolving. Certainly, there's a bit  
 of feature creep here & there, but overall it gives the feeling that D  
 is certainly bridging the gap between programming paradigms and  
 presenting itself as a modern language.

I don't want to start a new wave of this holy war. It is need to clarify  
my question: there are good examples of new versions of languages which do  
not require redesigning already written programs: evolution of Java,  

(prior to 3.0) and so on. These aren't 100% source code compatible, but  
switching to a new version requires only relative small changes in  

ground-breaking features in the language). So my question means: would D  
2.0 be in the state when new language modifications won't require  
redesigning old programs? Unlike to the situation with const in D 2.0  
which requires careful addition of const in D 1.0-based programs.

-- 
Regards,
Yauheni Akhotnikau

Walter Bright <newshound1 digitalmars.com> writes:

Robert Fraser wrote:
 I hope it isn't.
 
 I like the fact that D is constantly evolving. Certainly, there's a bit 
 of feature creep here & there, but overall it gives the feeling that D 
 is certainly bridging the gap between programming paradigms and 
 presenting itself as a modern language.

We'll just start on D 3.0 then.

"Craig Black" <cblack ara.com> writes:

"Walter Bright" <newshound1 digitalmars.com> wrote in message 
news:fjb1ii$1jsv$2 digitalmars.com...
 Robert Fraser wrote:
 I hope it isn't.

 I like the fact that D is constantly evolving. Certainly, there's a bit 
 of feature creep here & there, but overall it gives the feeling that D is 
 certainly bridging the gap between programming paradigms and presenting 
 itself as a modern language.

 We'll just start on D 3.0 then.

I would hope that when D 2.0 features have been completed, that some time 
and effort will be expended toward stability and back-end optimization. 
Personally, I would prefer an high-quality 2.0 to a 3.0.  Besides, given the 
scope of D 2.0, I can't quite fathom what features you would include in a D 
3.0.

-Craig 

Walter Bright <newshound1 digitalmars.com> writes:

Craig Black wrote:
 Besides, given the 
 scope of D 2.0, I can't quite fathom what features you would include in a D 
 3.0.

It's far too early to make plans, but I expect 3.0 would be a push to 
support functional programming and other things for multicore programming.

Charles D Hixson <charleshixsn earthlink.net> writes:

Walter Bright wrote:
 Craig Black wrote:
 Besides, given the scope of D 2.0, I can't quite fathom what features 
 you would include in a D 3.0.

 
 It's far too early to make plans, but I expect 3.0 would be a push to 
 support functional programming and other things for multicore programming.

How about a run-time interpretive layer, or a good graphics 
library (not form building, but the kind of thing form 
building libraries are built from)?

Most things I can think of, except run-time interpretation 
(ala Python or Smalltalk), seem to be library improvements.  I 
suppose that a better C++ interface could be invoked here, but 
I see that as a part of 2.x.

"Craig Black" <craigblack2 cox.net> writes:

"Walter Bright" <newshound1 digitalmars.com> wrote in message 
news:fjc8ls$7lq$1 digitalmars.com...
 Craig Black wrote:
 Besides, given the scope of D 2.0, I can't quite fathom what features you 
 would include in a D 3.0.

 It's far too early to make plans, but I expect 3.0 would be a push to 
 support functional programming and other things for multicore programming.

I was under the impression that transactional memory would be included in 
2.0.

Walter Bright <newshound1 digitalmars.com> writes:

Craig Black wrote:
 I was under the impression that transactional memory would be included 
 in 2.0.


Too soon to tell.

"David Wilson" <dw botanicus.net> writes:

On 12/8/07, Craig Black <craigblack2 cox.net> wrote:
 "Walter Bright" <newshound1 digitalmars.com> wrote in message
 news:fjc8ls$7lq$1 digitalmars.com...
 Craig Black wrote:
 Besides, given the scope of D 2.0, I can't quite fathom what features you
 would include in a D 3.0.

 It's far too early to make plans, but I expect 3.0 would be a push to
 support functional programming and other things for multicore programming.

 I was under the impression that transactional memory would be included in
 2.0.

It seems to me, D being a pragmatic language targeting realistic
environments, STM wouldn't be a win with the number of cores most
machines have these days (right?).

Plus, that area still seems to be seeing rapid evolution. It'd be
pretty terrible if we ended up with some syntax in 2.0 for an
experimental feature that could end up being the "const debate" of
3.0, simply by jumping the gun before the technology has stabilized
enough to be generally useful.

Robert Fraser <fraserofthenight gmail.com> writes:

David Wilson wrote:
 Plus, that area still seems to be seeing rapid evolution. It'd be
 pretty terrible if we ended up with some syntax in 2.0 for an
 experimental feature that could end up being the "const debate" of
 3.0, simply by jumping the gun before the technology has stabilized
 enough to be generally useful.

IMO, the syntax Bartoz presented at the conference was fine.

Walter Bright <newshound1 digitalmars.com> writes:

eao197 wrote:
 On Fri, 07 Dec 2007 04:48:40 +0300, Walter Bright 
 The idea is that the book will represent D 2.0.

 
 Could we expect that D 2.0 will be stable enough at Oct 2008 and there 
 won't be new compatibility-breaking changes in the language?

Yes.