my demise

[Fredrik Olsson]

Kyle Furlong skrev:
<snip>
> The OP was about the failure of D as a good fit for the poster's 
> project. I was merely pointing out that "good enough" obviously wasn't 
> good enough in this case.

And my points are that
1. Emacs (or any other text editor) and gdb (or any other debugger) is
    more than good enough. Even a bonus, as tight integration with a
    "standard tool" would ruin it for users without access to the "right
    standard tool".
2. Richard Koch was well aware of the lack of:
    * "Visual Studio"-like integrated tools.
    * GUI-libs, with design tools.
    * No 1.0 release.
3. An "Visual Studio"-like tool is not required for a language to be
    accessible to beginners, or for a language to become popular.

Childish to complain about that 4 months later, even stupid to waste 
that much time when it should have been obvious it was not what he 
wanted from the start.


I have no clue what he means by "usable libs, extensions and standard 
algos". There are many, many resources for grabbing and reusing existing 
code for D out there, for a wide variety of purposes. And I find them 
usable, and when I don't I write my own.


I would never come up with the idea to make an application with a 
graphical user interface using D today. So for those apps I choose 
another tools. I would be willing to invest some time fixing that 
deficiency if I saw a suggested solution I liked, writing a new GUI-lib 
is a huge task, and unless the involved love and believe in the idea 
110% the effort is wasted. Plus anything that is not platform 
independent is not interesting at all for me, and unless it takes 
advantage of the features of D, why waste the effort?
For the time being I use D for what I know it is good at: command line 
tools and server software without user integration.


// Fredrik Olsson