Incomprehensible compiler errors

[Stuart]

On Tuesday, 31 July 2012 at 09:26:42 UTC, Jakob Ovrum wrote:
> You're expecting the same diversity and quality of the 
> toolchain of a small, relatively new (D2 is from 2007) 
> programming language as you do from giants like C++ and .NET 
> languages. This is unreasonable.

You have a point, and I have no business complaining about the 
inadequacies of a free project. But nevertheless, it's 
discouraging to try out a new language (D, Nemerle, Cobra, etc 
etc) only to find that I can't actually write any programs in it.

By which I mean there is no way to create a GUI short of using 
the API directly. Try getting a bunch of controls to resize when 
you maximise their parent window - in .NET, this is trivial. If 
DFL worked, it would still be trivial. In D (or any other 
language with no decent tools) it's mind-bogglingly difficult.

I'm really impressed with D, and was planning to start writing an 
application in it yesterday. And all I got was obscure compiler 
errors and a non-functional DFL. So I was a little disappointed.

> As for VisualD, a lot of people - including myself - use it 
> without issue. It has never crashed for me. I recommend you 
> report your problem to the developer, or join development 
> yourself. If you just want a stable production environment, 
> start by disabling the clearly marked *experimental* 
> auto-complete feature if you have it enabled.

It was disabled until very recently, when I was advised to enable 
it. The crash - which I have already reported - occurs when 
opening the solution. Any D solution. Every time. When 
double-clicking the .sln file in Explorer (or using Win7 jump 
lists).

> Your swipes at Linux are ignorant and non-constructive.

Ignorant? I'm no expert, certainly, but ignorant? Hardly. I've 
used Linux. For example, I ran it on my server machine for a 
year. And one thing I learnt was that, until you start getting 
Linux driver discs when you buy hardware, it's useless. Who wants 
an operating system that doesn't work until you post on forums, 
hack config files, and recompile the kernel? No thank you.

> Besides, D has its roots on Windows, it's not "designed for 
> Linux" in any way.

I was talking about the general mindset. The mindset behind DFL, 
to be specific. The mindset of: "Don't give 'em an exe - give 'em 
source, an obscure makefile, and undocumented dependencies. Let 
them WORK for it." That's the Linux mentality, and it drives me 
up the wall.

I never said D was crap. I said its tools don't work. I was 
disappointed that I couldn't use D to write an application. Does 
that sound like someone who doesn't like the language?

> Your issues with compiling DFL are rooted completely in your 
> own ignorance of the C/C++/D compilation model.

Er, no. Before I used .NET, I used C++ almost exclusively for a 
number of years. I'm a little out of practice, but I understand 
the general principles involved. How about you stop making all 
these assumptions about my ignorance?

> You have a lot to learn and you should know that by now.

Oh, now, that's going too far. Do you think I'm some kind of 
programming newbie? A college student, perhaps? I have a BSc in 
Software Engineering, and I've been coding for 16 years. So let's 
have less of the condescension, hmm?

> Maybe tone down the aggressiveness a little; you've been 
> generating a lot of noise lately.

Lately? I've only recently discovered D. What are you comparing 
my current noise level to? Besides, most of my posts have been 
constructive, to my mind. Granted, I got a bit frustrated 
yesterday, but so what?