Tango development

[Bruce Adams]

Alix Pexton Wrote:

> Kris wrote:
> > There's recently been a couple of notable threads that I recall over Tango, 
> > which have been entirely non-constructive, and revolved almost entirely 
> > around small details such as module naming conventions.  It's like there's 
> > some kind of fear and loathing seething under the surface. I'm wondering 
> > whether it's because Tango is not generally discussed in the ng at all. I 
> > mean, it is developed and maintained completely /outside/ of this ng 
> > environment. Is there some basis for this notion? 
> > 
> > 
> 
> To me, it seems that both D and Tango are developed with a similar air of secrecy, widly discussed by those that are interested in them, both represented by their respective authors, but the process of decision making vieled and mysterious.
>
veiled ;) but agreed. It would be nice to know more about what's happening on the const front for example. even if the forum were read only.
 
> Occasionally there are announcements of a new version, even more occasionaly hints of new features upcoming, but no insight into the process that has built them.
> 
> Most are well recieved, and we all appreciate the effort that both parties put in to their work, but...
> 
> I cannot recall a single occasion wen Walter has dismissed an issue that was raised regarding the way that D works, he either welcomes the comments, offers constuctive counter arguments, or stays frustratingly quiet and mysterious.
> 
> Genuine enquiries about why Tango is like it is seem always to be met with the same few responces, "come to IRC/Our Forum", "well, you have a choice", dismissal of the issue as trivial and sometimes what seem to be personal remarks that have no baring on the issue.
> 
I think one thing explains a significant fraction of the difference. Walter probably reads almost every post here but unless he has a very specific question or point to make he keeps quiet and lets everyone else duke it out. The signal to noise ratio is much higher that way. It also lends him an aura of respect aside from being the language designer. The signal to noise ratio here has got beyond a joke. I can see why IRC would be preferred by people who like to respond to absolutely every query and get to the bottom of things quickly but on this kind of interface a more measured approach is usually better. I'm being a bit of a hypocrite here as I stick my oar in way too much but I think my point still stands.

Regards,

Bruce.