my demise

[Lionello Lunesu]

"Walter Bright" <newshound at digitalmars.com> wrote in message 
news:ehbqcr$1e8$1 at digitaldaemon.com...
> 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.

I'm using VS .NET 2005 with the vsplugind found on dsource. I find it works 
quite well. I can even use the built-in VS debugger (although breakpoints 
don't seem to work, but asm{int 3;} takes care of that).

L.