Slides from my ACCU Silicon Valley talk

[lurker]

Why don't you retard, I mean eternium, I mean iLikeCakes, I mean snk_kid, I mean WeAreAllTreeBear, I mean bearophile's alter ego, go someplace else. Waisting time here is really not worth it. They provide psychiatric treatment in hospitals. I can't prove this conspiracy easily, but I also voted down your stupid remarks there. I hope this teaches you a lesson.

retard Wrote:

> Tue, 14 Dec 2010 02:56:45 +0100, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
> 
> > Why do /you/ take it personally?
> 
> You've misunderstood. I only wish the discussion was a bit more technical 
> and had less to do with opinions and hype. The reason is, a more 
> technical approach might solve technical problems in more efficient way. 
> But my goal is not to belittle social issues wrt language adoption. 
> Surely I understand reddit isn't lambda-the-ultimate.org and I'm glad 
> that the Go trolls didn't find the thread (yet). I just find this 
> behavior incomprehensible. 
> 
> My personal stance on this matter is that I believe a more consistent and 
> flexible mechanism for operators would fit D. I'm also a bit more of a 
> fan of C++0x concepts than those contraints shown in the slides. I 
> haven't really thought how it all would work out, but if the atmosphere 
> was more ambitious to this direction, I could participate more. But it 
> seems my vision conflicts badly with what D2 has become.
> 
> > 
> > On 12/14/10, retard <re at tard.com.invalid> wrote:
> >> Mon, 13 Dec 2010 14:44:36 -0500, snk_kid wrote:
> >>
> >>> Gary Whatmore Wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Simen kjaeraas Wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> > Walter Bright <newshound2 at digitalmars.com> wrote:
> >>>> >
> >>>> > > Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> >>>> > >> Compared to the talk at Google, I changed one of the "cool
> >>>> > >> things" from threading to operator overloading. Didn't manage to
> >>>> > >> talk about that - there were a million questions - although I
> >>>> > >> think it's a great topic.
> >>>> > >>  http://erdani.com/tdpl/2010-12-08-ACCU.pdf
> >>>> > >
> >>>> > >
> >>>> > > Anyone care to do the honors and post this to reddit programming?
> >>>> >
> >>>> > Done.
> >>>> >
> >>>> > http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/eklq0/
> >> andrei_alexandrescus_talk_at_accu_silicon_valley/
> >>>>
> >>>> Guys, I made several sockpuppet reddit accounts to mod down the two
> >>>> guys >criticising this thread. I recommend everyone to help us
> >>>> improve D's publicity by >ignoring these trolls and voting them down.
> >>>> It has worked before, too -- reddit >seems to fold the subthreads
> >>>> that get too many negative votes. This makes it >look much better
> >>>> than it is.
> >>>>
> >>>>  - G.W.
> >>>
> >>> That's absolutely pathetic, you're actually doing the community a
> >>> disservice.
> >>
> >> I really don't know what to say. Take a look at
> >>
> >> 0 points: http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/eklq0/
> >> andrei_alexandrescus_talk_at_accu_silicon_valley/c18swbi
> >>
> >> or
> >>
> >> -1 points: http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/eklq0/
> >> andrei_alexandrescus_talk_at_accu_silicon_valley/c18sz8n
> >>
> >> These say nothing against D. Why does one take them personally? They
> >> are both also highly informative. As far as I can tell, these two
> >> comments go much deeper in operator semantics theory than the combined
> >> effort of 68 other threads by Walter, Andrei et al. For example the
> >> precedence of operators can get problematic when using several
> >> libraries from various vendors.
> >>
> >> Then you have:
> >>
> >> http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/eklq0/
> >> andrei_alexandrescus_talk_at_accu_silicon_valley/c18t1d5
> >>
> >> "I really like D (2.0) and I wish it would take off."
> >>
> >> 7 points? WTF? What is the value of this reply? It's a purely
> >> subjective opinion and doesn't necessarily even beg for further
> >> discussion.
> >>
>