my demise

[Walter Bright]

Kyle Furlong wrote:
> Like I said, people have disparate ideas of "good enough." If you are 
> content with no IDE project management, with using command line tools, 
> and manual debugging, thats fine for you. But many, many people out 
> there enjoy the ease of development that niceties like Visual Studio 
> give. I realize that many of you come from a C++ background, and this 
> might be the norm, but in the Java/C# world people dismiss D for the 
> lack of these things.

That's true.

> So if D is trying to woo that crowd, just throwing 
> your hands in the air and saying "ITS GOOD ENOUGH!" is NOT good enough.

Yes.

> Like you said, I think its a case of the right tool for the right job. 
> At this time, D is not suitable for anything other than code that 
> doesn't interface with anything but a command line, i.e. it is more of a 
> systems language. However I do think that D /should/ also be an 
> application programming language, and it should be easy. I hit 
> performance bottlenecks all the time in my C# apps, and I would love to 
> be able to redesign them in D. At this time though, its not worth the 
> effort.
> 
> Maybe I was wrong in thinking that D was headed in this direction, and 
> all Walter wanted was an easier C for writing robust OO operating 
> systems and drivers and libraries, web servers and infrastructure apps. 
> But if that is the case, I'm out of here, because that's not what I do.

I don't see any problem with D as an app language. I don't find IDE's to 
be useful. But it is pointless denying that others do find them useful, 
and it is obvious that the lack of an IDE has held D back. If anyone 
wants to do an IDE for D, I am very much in favor of the project.