Paradox about D's popularity.

[Jesse Phillips]

Gor F. Gyolchanyan Wrote:

> I'll look up any kind of programming language related sites and try to put D put
> there.

One problem we have is that there are many that have heard of D, but they either don't hear it enough to consider it any good or know of some problem that may have already been fixed or will be fixed and can't let it go.

> Another big downside, that i noticed in development of D and DMD is
> unpredictability. I think we should make schedules for regular releases of batches
> of bug-fixes and feature enhancements of DMD, so that people will be able to use
> yet-unimplemented features of they're certainly going to be implemented in the
> next release.

For the most part someone would need to take this role. As a body of volunteers people do what itches them the most. If someone maintained a list of bugs that should be fixed in the next X number of releases it would server as a good reference even if they are not all tackled. And it must take input from the volunteers on which they will be working on.

There is a general consensus on what type of reports get priority over others. DMD does get fairly regular releases and can't always stick to a tight schedule. Once a month has been the norm while 2-3 months may pass.

http://www.prowiki.org/wiki4d/wiki.cgi?LanguageDevel#Roadmap
 
> Also in the light of recent investigation, i think it would be very wise to turn
> our attention to enhance D's compatibility with C++, since this is one of the
> biggest problems, that companies will face if they decide to switch to D. If D
> gains a good enough compatibility with C++ (i know, it's a really difficult job),

To my understanding D does have good support for C++ now. The limitations come from multiple inheritance, like you said, and templates.

Multiple inheritance of C++ won't be supported as D doesn't have any mapping for it.

Templates are a problem because they must be compiled, and DMD will not include a C++ parser just to have access to templates.

> then the cost of switching to D will dramatically decrease, because less and less
> C++ code will need to be rewritten. For those cases when direct access to C++ is
> impossible (probably, with multiple inheritance involved), we could make D
> libraries, that would interpret C++ headers at compile time and generate wrappers
> around it (and such).

Wouldn't this basically be a C++ to C interfacing tool? Such a tool sounds kind of interesting, does one exist? Why doesn't one exist? Why do existing ones not get used?

> It'll take a lot of effort, but it's possible and given the current situation of
> commercial non-usability of D it would be a good idea.

Welcome and good luck promoting D. Please select something you wish to work on and I hope you'll find the support you need. Remember we are a small community and all have something we wish D was better at. And as Bearophile points out, we should be looking to advertise with the right information at the right time.