TIOBE December 2015 - D rose 5 positions

[Joakim via Digitalmars-d]

On Friday, 8 January 2016 at 18:01:39 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad 
wrote:
> On Friday, 8 January 2016 at 04:10:58 UTC, Joakim wrote:
>
>> OK, not a full C competitor, but taking some of the 
>> higher-level work.  I think D could take all of C's domain, 
>> Walter certainly knows how.
>
> He has categorically refused to add volatile or VLA...

Because he prefers other solutions for those problems.

>> Yes, which is why many apps that are debuting now are native 
>> mobile-only, their devs can't be bothered with arcane and 
>> inefficient legacy platforms like the web. :)
>
> Which ones? The only one I know of are either redundant or 
> involves payment. Developing for mobile is maybe 8x more 
> expensive than web...

Snapchat has no Windows or web app, you literally can't use it on 
Windows. I've even heard of major shopping sites in developing 
markets that shut down their mobile web sites, referring all 
traffic to the mobile app instead.  Whether this is only because 
of the mobile craze or real issues they had with web dev, I don't 
know.

>> A scene graph jammed into an antiquated document layout, then 
>> stylesheet and scripting languages mashed on top: what could 
>> go wrong? :D
>
> Uhm, not sure what you mean by that. Qt, cocoa etc are more old 
> fashioned...
> You also have WAI requirements... Required by law!

So accessibility is only required of web browsers?  Sure, many 
antiquated native UI frameworks are almost as bad, but I'd guess 
that none in wide use is as bad.

>> Complexity kills.  Try searching the Chromium issue tracker 
>> for "painting" and see how many issues pop up:
>
> I experience this once every two years. Usually fixed in less 
> than a day.

I'd regularly hit such painting issues, largely because I was 
running the Dev version and then report them.  Many are weeded 
out before hitting Chrome Stable, whereas others persisted over 
many Stable releases, before magically disappearing one day, 
likely randomly fixed by some commit that introduced some other 
bug. ;)

>> I suggested something completely different in my post, 
>> chucking the web stack altogether and starting from scratch.  
>> The incremental approaches you suggest cannot really change 
>> much.
>
> Did you provide a novel solution?

I haven't seen such proposed elsewhere, but you'd have to decide 
that for yourself.  In any case, since it's still using the same 
client-server approach as the web, I don't think it matters: that 
entire approach is doomed.

>> Sounds like you're joking, but I was surprised to find that 
>> the torrent client I ran on my Android tablet ran really fast, 
>> better than the one I tried on my laptop.  There's a p2p wave 
>> coming, that will kill off most of this stupid cloud stuff, 
>> and take down the web stack with it.
>
> You cannot rely on static IP address.

Many home desktops don't have a static IP either, the ISP usually 
cycles them every couple days between customers.  In any case, 
not a real problem with current p2p tech, which doesn't assume it.

>> Let's see, I present arguments why it will happen, while you 
>> simply state that it cannot.  Who is it that's thinking 
>> wishfully here? :)
>
> Statistically unlikely when you reach critical mass. The web 
> has more critical mass than any other IT infrastructure.

Did any companies have more critical mass than Microsoft with 
Windows and Intel with x86 chips?  Yet, they missed the largest 
computing platform of them all, the smartphone, which Apple rode 
to become the largest and most profitable company on the planet.  
You greatly overestimate the value of "mass" in this day and age.

>> I'm not sure what you mean by the web going down that path, 
>> but I'm talking about not sending GUI info whatsoever, ie 
>> going back to something like plaintext email, where users 
>> simply send messages back and forth and the client figures out 
>> how to render it.
>
> Wont happen as long as there are business opportunities in 
> creating islands. Only works if open source destroy the market.

That's a good point, so much is tied to business models.  The 
cloud is largely sustained by dumb VCs and large corporations 
dumping billions into it, despite Ballmer's sage point that 
nobody makes any real money there other than google.  They all 
imagine they're the next google, when really they're the next 
Dash Navigation.

Open source would definitely be a big piece of the p2p wave, as 
you could get a lot more done with less source using each, but I 
think there will be a big role for new business models too.  
Since the current cloud business models don't actually make 
money, all the new business models have to do is be profitable 
and they'll quickly kill the cloud off. :)

> Ref the web.

No idea what this means, you think the web won because it was 
open source?  It was an open standard, but it certainly was not 
open source when it won in the '90s.