Moving back to .NET

[Chris via Digitalmars-d]

On Friday, 25 September 2015 at 13:13:29 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad 
wrote:
> On Friday, 25 September 2015 at 11:24:04 UTC, Bruno Medeiros 
> wrote:
>> Dunno if "expect" is the right word, but a language team that 
>> puts IDE support as part of its development effort, will have 
>> a big competitive advantage.
>
> Indeed, when you are production ready having a top notch IDE 
> becomes a big competitive advantage! I don't know if an IDE 
> attracts people who work on compilers/debuggers though...
>
>> and basic tools). For example, they contracted an external 
>> developer to help them with debugger issues
>
> Sure, excellent debugging support (lldb/gdb) is important.

Having followed this forum for 2 or 3 years now, I doubt whether 
an IDE would attract people at this stage. If we had a 
full-fledged IDE, there would be other concerns (or excuses). D 
scares people away. It's too raw, too bare bones, everything is 
still moving like hot lava, and maybe people are intimidated by 
it, because they feel they might be considered bad programmers, 
if they don't know the ins and outs of it.

Yesterday someone said too me "You must know D inside out by 
now!" I replied "I know it well enough to know that I don't know 
it well enough." There's no end to D in terms of knowledge, in 
terms of learning about programming, and this scares people away. 
They prefer a set menu, they want rules and strict guidelines. 
They want to feel comfortable and secure in what they're doing. 
Java, C# and Go cater for this. D doesn't, and that's why it has 
no traction. D openly shows what's going on under the hood, not 
just a nice facade. But nobody really wants to see that. The 
frequent demands for an IDE are a symptom of this.