Final by default?

Ola Fosheim Grøstad" <ola.fosheim.grostad+dlang at gmail.com> Ola Fosheim Grøstad" <ola.fosheim.grostad+dlang at gmail.com>
Tue Mar 18 11:53:54 PDT 2014


On Tuesday, 18 March 2014 at 18:34:14 UTC, bearophile wrote:
> In this phase of D life commercial developers can't justify to 
> have the language so frozen that you can't perform reasonable 
> improvements as the one discussed in this thread.

I don't disagree, but D is suffering from not having a production 
ready compiler/runtime with a solid optimizing backend in 
maintenance mode. So it is giving other languages "free traction" 
rather than securing its own position.

I think there is a bit too much focus on standard libraries, 
because not having libraries does not prevent commercial 
adoption. Commercial devs can write their own C-bindings if the 
core language, compiler and runtime is solid. If the latter is 
not solid then only commercial devs that can commit lots of 
resources to D will pick it up and keep using it (basically the 
ones that are willing to turn themselves into D shops).

Perhaps also D2 was announced too early, and then people jumped 
onto it expecting it to come about "real soon". Hopefully the 
language designers will do D3 design on paper behind closed doors 
for a while before announcing progress and perhaps even 
deliberately keep it at gamma/alpha quality in order to prevent 
devs jumping ship to D2 prematurely. :-)

That is how I view it, anyway.


More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list