It is the year 2020: why should I use / learn D?

[Laeeth Isharc]

On Saturday, 17 November 2018 at 04:21:50 UTC, NoMoreBugs wrote:
> On Saturday, 17 November 2018 at 02:07:45 UTC, Laeeth Isharc 
> wrote:
>>
>> And to return to an old point.  It's much better to focus on 
>> people that like what you are doing and already using your 
>> product than those who say "if only you would do X, D would be 
>> huge".
>
> Given D's very small user base, that's probably not the mindset 
> you want the foundation to be in ;-)

I understand the words, but not the commercial logic.  That's 
exactly the mindset I personally think the Foundation ought to 
have - just my opinion though.  Talk is cheap and one succeeds by 
doing more of what's working at least a little in my experience 
(whilst generating enough cheap experiments to have little 
successes to build on, something in this case more up to users 
than the foundation).

I definitely don't think it's a profitable strategy to listen to 
advice, well meaning or not, to people who aren't involved about 
what would be conceptually wonderful.

> That mindset, will ensure your small user base never grows, and 
> will likely get smaller and smaller.

Evidently you don't see yourself as part of the D community from 
your phrasing.  That's an assertion and we are all entitled to 
our opinions but to be persuasive reasoned arguments are often 
more effective. What you say is the opposite of my experience as 
well as basic commercial common sense.

> Even the C++ Committee cannot risk being in that mindset - not 
> anymore anyway.

People who run big organisations are often quite clueless about 
the challenges involved in running small organisations. And the 
same is true of language communities.  I don't really see that 
it's a matter of "even the C++ committee" - their context is just 
so utterly different.

> To grow the user base, you need to listen and respond to 
> *their* needs - ask any streamer ;-)

Yes - the needs of people who are using D in a serious way 
already and prominent contributors to the community.  People like 
Manu for example, if we are speaking of individuals.  Some


> As long as I use D, I have 'skin in the game'.
>
> When I stop using D, I'll have no interest in trying to voice 
> my opinion about how it can better serve my needs.

What projects are you working on?  And how do your needs flow out 
of your context?  How many lines of code have you written in D?  
What's your github handle?  What's been your biggest success in D?


> Also, you seem to be saying that D is more of an incubation 
> language, for creative ideas?

Where did I suggest more of that and less of industrial strength? 
Its certainly good for creative projects because its quite 
productive and because its so plastic.  Seems pretty good for 
running industrial strength projects too.  Just its perhaps not 
the first choice if you want pretty refactoring tools.  Is there 
anything at all controversial or surprising about any of these 
observations?

> This duality of purpose, is just confusing - and in my opinion, 
> is holding back the language.

Duality of purpose? I think you mistake a snapshot in time for 
something planned or essential in some Platonic sense.

> A language with only 2 gatekeepers makes sense for a language 
> that wants to be an incubation language for creative ideas - 
> even more so when its for the creative ideas of those 2 
> gatekeepers.

Yes and that's why Apple never went anywhere until they told Jobs 
to stick to relationships and PR and let the grown ups on the 
committee design things.  Or not.  Or perhaps it wasn't that but 
the focus groups that were truly responsible for the success of 
Apple.

A very small number of minds working closely together can be 
creative and design something beautiful, or have a chance to do 
so.  A committee, notoriously, is a machine for suppressing 
creativity.

> I know of no widely used industrial strength language that has 
> only 2 gatekeepers. Because how can only 2 people be 
> representative of its vast number of users? >it's not possible.

You're right.  Python was such a promising language but it never 
stood a chance with not even two but just one BDFL.  Now that 
they have moved to some kind of committee structure, I am sure 
that bodes well for the future flourishing of the language.  Or 
is in fact the opposite true?