We are forking D

[Timon Gehr]

On 1/9/24 14:00, BlueBeach wrote:
> On Tuesday, 9 January 2024 at 08:45:03 UTC, whitebyte wrote:
>> It's fascinating that Walter did not relate to this at all, but 
>> readily jumped into a lengthy technical discussion of a tangentially 
>> related topic.
> 
> Agreed, particularly with the word „fascinating“.
> 
> I think the whole forking situation is kinda sad. This fork will 
> probably go nowhere, that something that had been proven time and time 
> again unfortunately.

Not really. See druntime.

> And I‘m afraid for dlang it will be a net negative too.
> ...

A bit of competition is usually a good thing. It's also not like the two 
projects have no synergies, they are literally built on the same code base.

> I just reread the whole thread and I think in the first 4 to 5 pages the 
> discussion stayed mostly on topic. But then the discussion first got a 
> little more confrontational when some senior dlang people joined the 
> discussion. Subsequently the entire discussion was basically ended by 
> drowning it in technical detail for the next 5 pages.
> ...

Well, the stubbornly different understanding of technical details of 
DIP1027 vs DIP1038e is the final straw that spawned the fork.

Also, more senior dlang people tend to use e.g. thunderbird rather than 
forum.dlang.org, with a threaded view.

> To be honest it is hard for me  to see the end goal of this strategy. 
> What makes it so hard to discuss this fork and engage on topic? Why not 
> let them at least have their discussion?

Walter opened a new thread now.