DConf 2014 Day 2 Talk 3: Designing an Aurora: A Glimpse at the Graphical Future of D by Adam Wilson

[via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On Thursday, 10 July 2014 at 14:59:47 UTC, Tofu Ninja wrote:
> YES(I am so glad some one else sees this)! This is basically 
> what I have been saying all along. I hoped the immediate mode 
> could be (1) and the retained mode could be (2/3) so that we 
> could have both and not be limited, but that does not seem to 
> be the direction it is going.

Oh, good then we are on the same frontier! :-) I thought you 
preferred an integrated approach. In my experience big frameworks 
tend to never get the APIs quite right, become tedious to work 
with, are difficult to adapt and seldom reach completion before 
they are out-of-date.

Much better with small, nimble, focused, polishable and 
performant IMO.

> As it stands now, the direction that Aurora is taking seems to 
> be an odd one IMHO. It is trying to be some thing in between 
> (1) and (2/3) but I don't think that is useful to any one 
> except maybe gui writers. That is what prompted me to post.

Right, I could use (1) and (2) , but have no obvious use case for 
(3)… So if Aurora does not partition the design space into 
independent parts, then I can't use it.

I think the library space needs to be partioned properly just 
like the language/memory space (nogc/gc) in order to appeal to 
interactive app writers.