Marketing D [ was Re: GCC 4.6 ]

[Walter Bright]

Russel Winder wrote:
> I appreciate this is going off topic somewhat for the list, never mind
> the original posting, but I think summarizing this issue should be
> constructive -- albeit me seemingly acting as Devil's Advocate.  (NB
> This is not a troll, for me these are serious issues -- I am a
> consultant and therefore whilst I do no significant development on big
> projects, I advise influencers and decision makers.)
> 
> The marketing problem for D, at least as it impinges on me, is that it
> is "Walter's language with Andrei helping out".  No matter that this may
> be an unfair and incorrect representation of reality overall, it is
> nonetheless what the project management and CTO/CIO community perceive
> of D, if they have heard of it at all.

Most (all?) languages have one or two prime designers behind it. What mystifies 
me is why this is considered a bad thing for D.


> Let us assume the competition that D aims at is C, C++ and Go.  I think
> we can ignore the VM-based community for now in this as they are either
> C/C++/Python/Lua or Java/Scala/Groovy/Clojure/C/C++ centred with little
> chance of looking for alternatives.  Where the "native code" and
> "virtual machine" communities have overlap, it is generally handled by
> build, usually using SCons, Waf, or some home-grown equivalent.
> 
> C and C++ have international standards, multiple compliant (!)
> realizations, huge vendor support, a long history, and much tooling.  Go
> has Google behind it.

C and C++ existed and were successful long before any of those standards 
existed. C++ was "Bjarne's language" for 15 years, and that did not impair it. 
C, of course, is Kernighan and Ritchie's. Perl is Larry Wall's. Python is Guido 
van Rossum's. And on and on. (Perl, Python, Ruby, have only one implementation.)


> D is perceived as a collection of "one-man band" bits with a few
> hangers-on.  In this light, there is no way for D to have any traction,
> even if it is technically a better language than any of the actual
> competition.

Yet other successful languages follow this same model. Why is it bad for D? I 
suspect it really is some other issue.



> In order to get the ability to get traction, I see two main ways
> forward:
> 
> 1.  A big company gets involved and provides resources to ramp up on the
> productization of the end-to-end toolchain and library support -- so all
> of IDE support Qt, GTK libraries, etc. -- and gets some seriously
> high-profile projects using D.

I agree that would help enormously.


> 2.  The project goes fully open source with a core of 5 or 6 people,
> supported by employers or via some form of sponsorship, actively working
> nigh on full time to ramp up on the productization of the end-to-end
> toolchain and library support -- so all of IDE support Qt, GTK
> libraries, etc. -- and gets some seriously high-profile projects using
> D.

D is fully open source.


> Over the roughly four to five years I have known about D very little has
> seemed to change in the organization and marketing of the language and
> its development.  The technical quality is there, the intention is
> there, but the realization of the dream has had no constructive effort.
> The ACCU conference has a couple of talks on or mentioning D each year,
> but there is nothing in between, There seems to be no "D buzz", even in
> London.  Compare this to the "buzz" in London about Go.  Not to mention
> the continued interest and "buzz" around C, C++, Java, Scala, Clojure,
> etc.
> 
> Some (arguably rhetorical) questions:
> 
> --  Why did Google push Go rather than use D when they became
> dissatisfied with C, C++, etc.
> 
> --  Can D be used for the native clients in the web applications arena
> that seem to be coming, cf. Go's NaCl.
> 
> --  Why don't ThoughtWorks use Go and D, but push Clojure and Ruby?
> 
> --  How come no recruitment agent cares about D experience (or lack of
> it)?
> 
> --  What will make companies take the risk and use D for a project
> instead of C++?  Or put another way why do companies just use C and C++
> even ion the face of better alternatives?
> 
> Actually I know the answers to the last two and they have no basis in
> technical issues.
> 
> Having already written half an essay, I think I will leave it there.  I
> really would like to see D get some serious traction, but to be honest
> with the way things have and continue to go, I have doubts.  Can I be
> proved wrong?

Sometimes I feel people are just waiting around, wanting to use D, but waiting 
for someone else to make the first move. It's like a dance club, where everyone 
sits on their toes wanting to go out on the floor, but unwilling to be the 
first. As soon as someone does, whoosh, everyone follows.