duck!

[Walter Bright]

Steven Schveighoffer wrote:
> On Sat, 16 Oct 2010 13:19:36 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu 
> <SeeWebsiteForEmail at erdani.org> wrote:
> 
>> The problem with "adaptTo" is that, just like itoa or printf, it is 
>> too boring to have marketing value.
> 
> Wait, really?  This statement has no place in a programming language 
> decision IMO.

One would think programmers are above all that, but we are not.


> Nobody is going to start using D because it has a 
> function *named* duck.

Maybe not, but it will raise awareness that "D has duck typing". Otherwise, I 
guarantee you that people will argue that "I need duck typing, and Z has it and 
D does not" if it is named adaptTo.

People will search on "duck typing in D" and with the duck template, they'll 
drop right in on it. With "adaptTo", it'll be on page 67 of the results, they'll 
never find it, and will conclude that D cannot do duck typing.


> Let's change writef to shazam!  Let's call File BitLocker!  And 'to' 
> really should be called transformationVehicle!

Think of it another way. Remember zip files? What a great name, and yes, it 
seemed silly at first, but zip entered the lexicon and D has a zip module and it 
never occurs to anyone it might be better named std.compressedArchive. Phil Katz 
renamed arc files "zip" files, called his compressor "pkzip" and blew away arc 
so badly that most people are unaware it even existed.

I think the catchy, silly "zip" name was a significant factor in getting people 
to notice his program. In contrast, the superior "lharc" with its "lzh" files 
never caught on.


> If you want to help market D, come up with some better logos, help 
> redesign the web site, and maybe write a book (oh wait, you already did 
> that :)

We are working on all of that. It's all important.