D is our last hope

[Hors]

On Saturday, 16 December 2023 at 21:11:42 UTC, aberba wrote:
> On Thursday, 14 December 2023 at 14:02:26 UTC, bachmeier wrote:
>> On Thursday, 14 December 2023 at 05:40:04 UTC, Hors wrote:
>>> On Tuesday, 12 December 2023 at 15:02:11 UTC, bachmeier wrote:
>>>> On Monday, 11 December 2023 at 21:21:46 UTC, Bradley Chatha 
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> [...]
>>>>
>>>> I suppose this is why my experience with D has been much 
>>>> better than reported by others. When I started, I was able 
>>>> to call into R for anything I needed, with no loss of 
>>>> efficiency. Need a database? It's there. Need a machine 
>>>> learning library like TensorFlow? It's there. Need parallel 
>>>> random number generation? It's there.
>>>>
>>>> [...]
>>>
>>> D is not the best when it comes to interop with other 
>>> languages
>>
>> It's not terribly helpful to post something like that without 
>> elaborating. I've been doing that for ten years and it works 
>> great.
>
> Sometimes I wonder how many of the D criticisms come from those 
> who have been using the language for yrs in this community or 
> have experience enough to make an informed critique.
>
>
> From my limited understanding, D allows nogc code, GC code, 
> safe code, interop with many langs, etc. yet it's always not 
> enough for some reason.
>
> I wonder how many of those folks are really serious about using 
> the language cus it *seems* to me that a lot of experienced D 
> devs are quietly getting things done.
>
>
> Is there something I'm missing?

How many is "a lot" actually, we literally only have two 
sponsors, many of dead projects in DUB and hardly seeing new 
projects registered (only to get abandoned after a few months or 
even a few weeks). Also telling they get the job done "quietly", 
are you trying to hide the fact dlang is nearly dead and say 
"they just do it quietly", Dlang's libraries are really limited, 
you either have to write from scratch, or interop with another 
language (which will usually require to write some bridge code by 
hand)

> I wonder how many of those folks are really serious about using 
> the language

Are you telling me I'm not even serious about using the language? 
Then why I'm even writing here?

My goal is not calling dlang is bad, but I think potential of 
dlang is being wasted, that's why I am writing here.

The gap of system programming is already filled with Zig, C, C++ 
and Rust. Making a mixed programming language of system and 
general-purpose just means the language is not a system language 
nor a general purpose language, dlang have to select a side, no 
language can be used everywhere.