This is why I don't use D.

[Everlast]

On Wednesday, 5 September 2018 at 12:32:33 UTC, Andre Pany wrote:
> On Wednesday, 5 September 2018 at 06:47:00 UTC, Everlast wrote:
>> On Wednesday, 5 September 2018 at 01:39:04 UTC, Paul Backus 
>> wrote:
>>> On Wednesday, 5 September 2018 at 00:49:36 UTC, Everlast 
>>> wrote:
>>>> [...]
>>>
>>> If you don't want to use D, then don't use D. No one is 
>>> holding a gun to your head.
>>>
>>> It seems to me like what D needs, right now, is people who 
>>> are willing to roll up their sleeves and get to work when 
>>> they see something that needs fixing. If that's something 
>>> you're either unable or unwilling to do, for whatever reason, 
>>> then D probably isn't a good choice for you right now. And 
>>> that's ok. We all have our own goals and priorities, and no 
>>> single programming language is going to be a perfect fit for 
>>> everybody.
>>
>>
>> I'm not going to sit here and spend have my time fixing shit 
>> that should have never broke in the first place.
>>
>> Thanks, you've made a great decision for me, I'm not longer 
>> using D for anything. The only reason I used it was for it's 
>> binary support and meta programming... no longer. Screw 
>> performance, non one else really cares and one doesn't 
>> necessarily need meta programming.
>>
>> Thanks, see you in another life!
>
> You showed as a painful issue in our eco system which we can 
> work on, thank you.
>
> You do not need to work on this but do you have a proposal for 
> a solution? What would you help (ranking according to last 
> update, ...)
>
> Kind regards
> Andre


The problem is that all projects should be maintained. The issue, 
besides the tooling which can only reduce the problem to 
manageable levels, is that projects go stale over time.

This is obvious! You say though "But we can't maintain every 
package, it is too much work"... and that is the problem, not 
that it is too much work but there are too many packages. This is 
the result of allowing everyone to build their own kitchen sink 
instead of having some type of common base types.

It's sort of like most things now... say cell phone batteries... 
everyone makes a different one to their liking and so it is a big 
mess to find replacements after a few years.


See, suppose if there were only one package... and everyone 
maintained it. Then as people leave other people will come in in 
a continual basis and the package will always be maintained as 
long as people are using it.

This is why D needs organization, which it has none. It needs 
structure so things work and last and it isn't a continual fight.

It's like if someone doesn't take care of their car. Eventually 
it starts to break down and when they do shitty fixes it only 
buys them a little time before it breaks down again and again.

The issue isn't the fixes nor the car but how they use the car 
and not maintain it properly. That is, it is their mindsets. 
Since D seems to be full of people with very little understanding 
how how to build a proper foundation for organization, D has 
little chance of surviving. As the car breaks down more and more 
it is just a matter of time before it ends up in the junk heap. 
It was a great car while it lasted though...