http://wiki.dlang.org/DIP25

[Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d]

On 12/29/14 4:40 PM, Manu via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On 29 December 2014 at 14:13, Andrei Alexandrescu via Digitalmars-d
> <digitalmars-d at puremagic.com> wrote:
>> On 12/28/14 7:40 PM, Manu via Digitalmars-d wrote:
>>> I'd also like to know how this will help DIP69?
>>
>>
>> Just takes the entire ref handling out of the equation.
>
> Then DIP69 seems to lose all purpose?
> The whole thing is about safer indirections.

DIP69 allows defining entire variables with "scope", something DIP25 
does not address (but helps enforcing safety for).

> I was giving a context with vibe.d, but I think they key take-aways were:
>
> First-impressions; in our case, that was Windows environment setup,
> but the point should be taken generally, and that includes IDE
> integration. The effect of a poor experience here is eroding user
> confidence before they've even written a single line of code.
> Expectations are high, other programming communities are nailing this.
>
> Debugging was the biggest issue, and turned out to be the dealbreaker.
> We couldn't get behind something that we were unable to fix if we have
> to. (I say 'we', meaning the general office perception, and that
> perception was definitely coloured by the prior experiences re;
> first-impressions)
>
> Also documentation received a lot of criticism from the new-users,
> although I didn't identify it as a deal-breaker. I experienced this
> same frustration myself years ago. It's easy to address, I just wanted
> to demonstrate importance.
>
>
> Trust me that these guys were REALLY excited to try out D when we got
> started. But their confidence was eroded very quickly by these factors
> in aggregate.
> I think D will get another shot with this lot at some later stage when
> demonstrable progress has been made.

Yah, I hear ya. We need to muster talent and funds to make all that happen.

>> Others harbored similar perceptions. The corollary has been that essentially
>> you're asking them to stop working on D aspects they do care about and start
>> working on D aspects you and others care about - all on their free time.
>
> I've already argued against this assertion, because it got kind of
> aggressive. I was just reporting a case-study.
> People can do whatever they want, I'm only trying to reaffirm the
> reality of the importance of the same stuff that I've been going on
> about since the day I showed up here.
> There has been really great improvement, and we're getting awfully
> close to the line, but we're still just a little way short.
>
> It's a shame, because that boring stuff that nobody is interested in
> working on is inhibiting people from getting amongst the cool stuff
> that's going on here.

Yah, and I used to somehow consider the community was at "fault" about 
it. There is something wrong when people don't have the time to 
contribute because they're too busy arguing in the forums - even the 
most trivial matters that would literally take vastly shorter time to 
actually fix. Then I thought it might be a failure of leadership: it's 
Walter and I who do something wrong if we're unable to rally the 
community into action. I'm open to suggestions on how to do better going 
forward.


Andrei