What are the worst parts of D?

Manu via Digitalmars-d digitalmars-d at puremagic.com
Wed Oct 8 15:19:47 PDT 2014


On 09/10/2014 2:40 am, "Joakim via Digitalmars-d" <
digitalmars-d at puremagic.com> wrote:
>
> On Wednesday, 8 October 2014 at 13:55:11 UTC, Manu via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
>>
>> On 08/10/2014 9:20 pm, "Don via Digitalmars-d"
>>>
>>> So what do we care about? Mainly, we care about improving the core
>>
>> product.
>>>
>>>
>>> In general I think that in D we have always suffered from spreading
>>
>> ourselves too thin. We've always had a bunch of cool new features that
>> don't actually work properly. Always, the focus shifts to something else,
>> before the previous feature was finished.
>>>
>>>
>>> And personally, I doubt that many companies would use D, even if with
>>
>> perfect C++ interop, if the toolchain stayed at the current level.
>>
>> As someone who previously represented a business interest, I couldn't
agree
>> more.
>> Aside from my random frustrated outbursts on a very small set of language
>> issues, the main thing I've been banging on from day 1 is the tooling.
Much
>> has improved, but it's still a long way from 'good'.
>>
>> Debugging, ldc (for windows), and editor integrations (auto complete,
>> navigation, refactoring tools) are my impersonal (and hopefully
>> non-controversial) short list. They trump everything else I've ever
>> complained about.
>> The debugging experience is the worst of any language I've used since the
>> 90's, and I would make that top priority.
>
>
> While it would be great if there were a company devoted to such D
tooling, it doesn't exist right now.  It is completely unrealistic to
expect a D community of unpaid volunteers to work on these features for
your paid projects.  If anybody in the community cared as much about these
features as you, they'd have done it already.
>
> I suggest you two open bugzilla issues for all these specific bugs or
enhancements and put up bounties for their development.  If you're not
willing to do that, expecting the community to do work for you for free is
just whining that is easily ignored.

We're just talking about what we think would best drive adoption.
Businesses aren't likely to adopt a language with the understanding that
they need to write it's tooling. Debugging, code competition and
refactoring are all expert tasks that probably require compiler involvement.

I know it's easy to say that businesses with budget should contribute more.
But it's a tough proposition. Businesses will look to change language if it
saves them time and money. If it's going to cost them money, and the state
of tooling is likely to cost them time, then it's not a strong proposition.
It's a chicken and egg problem. I'm sure business will be happy to
contribute financially when it's a risk free investment; ie, when it's
demonstrated that that stuff works for them.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puremagic.com/pipermail/digitalmars-d/attachments/20141009/9034183e/attachment.html>


More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list