When will D1 be finished?

Andrei Alexandrescu SeeWebsiteForEmail at erdani.org
Mon May 11 16:28:22 PDT 2009

Derek Parnell wrote:
> The D-Team should be dedicating resources to ensuring that the D1 
> implementation and D1 documentation are in alignment with each other.
>  By dedicating, I mean that is all that this D1-subteam of the D-Team
>  work on - no D2 work at all. Any D1 fixes that need to be propagated
> to D2 should be done by the D2-subteam. Priority should be given to
> getting D1 completed.

Well thank you General :o).

Derek, I have all respect for you and your contributions to D. The
response below does not have the slightest intent to pick on you but to
rein in an unhelpful pattern in this group.

I invite you to see the paragraph quoted above through a different pair 
of eyes - the eyes of someone with a different vision of what should be 
done for D, and also (most importantly) who believes in it strongly 
enough to invest their own non-existing free time  in effecting that 

I confess that this couch quarterbacking is mightily frustrating for 
both Walter and myself. All the pieces are there for anyone with a 
vision to make it happen. I understand you wanted to share your opinion 
on what would be best for the future of D, and that's laudable in and by 
itself, but such opinions have lately become a choir of whines 
fulfilling a "if I want something from D, and I expect Walter to do it" 
pattern. We need the exact opposite - if you care, what can *you* do to 
make D better? D needs action and leadership.

And why is D1 not finished? Most "finished" languages have 
implementation insufficiencies. I've read a couple of days ago that D1 
is unfinished (and unusable by implication) because contracts aren't 
inherited. If I were Walter, that would be the exact kind of claim that 
causes high blood pressure. This is ridiculous! Is *that* the feature 
that the building of a system hinges on? Is that really what's stopping 
you? Then go back and use contracts in C++, Java, or C#. My guess is, if 
anyone is whining that D1 is unusable because it doesn't have contract 
inheritance, tomorrow (should contract inheritance be fixed) they'll 
whine that it doesn't have named arguments, template virtuals, or a 
gorram cherry on top. Sheesh.

And finally - now that I got on to ranting - I won't out the innocent, 
but I find it tragicomic that one poster found out fit to rant at length 
about the need for stability, to then - within the space of 48 hours - 
to post requests for borderline uninteresting but mightily breaking 
changes to D1.

I guess I'm done with my Spring rant :o).


More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list