too early for D2 and too late for D1

[Jonathan M Davis]

> 2011/4/17 Gour-Gadadhara Dasa <gour at atmarama.net>
> 
> > On Sun, 17 Apr 2011 15:11:43 -0500
> > 
> > Andrew Wiley <debio264 at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Frankly, if your definition of "not ready" is that the compiler isn't
> > > packaged for you, D isn't the right community to begin with.
> > 
> > First of all, there is no 64bit compiler for FreeBSD. I was
> > researching about gdc and Iain Buclaw told me (on IRC) that there
> > might be problem with dmd runtime on FreeBSD.
> > 
> > Moreover, "QtD requires a patched dmd compiler.", so I simply do not
> > have time to fight such things.
> 
> I just want to add one thing. I am, too, trying to develop "real" open
> source applications in my free time, as well as practical closed
> source applications at work.
> 
> The problem I have been facing even since the start, and are still
> facing, is that even if _I_ can be motivated to overcome these
> hurdles, I cannot expect everyone else to feel the same motivation for
> a new "obscure" C-like language.
>  * At work, I have a hard time explaining to my co-workers why they
> need 3 hand-rolled, "this particular version" of compilers and
> libraries they've never heard of, just to compile my simple 200-line
> Mpeg analyzer.
>  * At my free time it's even worse. Finding people able and willing to
> spend some time on MY pet project for free is hard enough in itself.
> Explaining to them why they must first spend an afternoon dealing with
> dependencies drive away the few that got past the first criteria.
> 
> My view, is the D community right now are thinking long and hard about
> their own needs, and less of the needs of their users. (For a
> language, the application programmer IS the user.) Maybe even rightly
> so, getting things language-wise right from the start IS important!
> However, if it is desirable to attract developers that want to use D
> for productivity right now, there are a lot of practical issues that
> needs addressing, rough edges to smoothen, and hardly any of them lie
> in the language itself.

It's normal to have to deal with a new toolchain when dealing with a new 
programming language. It doesn't matter how mature a programming language and 
its toolchain are; if you're not familiar with it, then you have some learning 
to do. That's true of any programming language. Now, that's obviously a 
hurdle, but it's one that you always have to deal with when dealing with a new 
programming language, no matter how good it is or isn't. It's true that if the 
language were more mature, it would probably be easier to install and set up 
the compiler and standard libraries (particularly since Linux distros would 
then be set up to just install them all properly if you tell it to install the 
appropriate package or packages), but there are _always_ issues with getting 
someone to use a new language.

As for improvements to D, its libraries, and its toolchain, those improvements 
_are_ happening. All you have to do is look at the changelog to see that work 
is being done. However, there are only so many people involved, and it takes 
time. So, no, in many ways, D is not ready for prime time, but it's getting 
there. D is very useable at this point, but there's a still a lot of work to 
be done for it, and whether it'll do what you're looking for and do it well 
enough depends entirely on what you're trying to do. GUI applications would be 
one area where it's definitely behind, but GUI libraries are one of the 
hardest and most complicated types of libraries out there, so they're likely 
to be behind. We'll get there, but it takes time.

D continues to improve, but it still has a ways to go. But if you're willing 
to put up with its issues as it matures, it's well worth using.

- Jonathan M Davis