Feedback on Átila's Vision for D

[welkam]

On Thursday, 17 October 2019 at 15:19:32 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad 
wrote:
> So when people complain about the issues they are facing they 
> should be met with understanding and the problems should be 
> acknowledged. In the past that was not really the norm, in fact 
> it was quite the opposite, what they complained about was 
> outright dismissed and their opinions invalidated and ridiculed.

People acknowledge problems. Just look at learn forum, IRC or 
discord. Thats never a problem. What actually happens is that 
some one complains on forums. Then is being told that all the 
people who work have their hands full and if he/she wants that 
problem to be solved either should solve them self or pay some 
one to solve it for them. And thats a bitter pill to swallow and 
some people refuse to accept the reality. Then all the post about 
how people do not acknowledge problems happen. People do not 
realise that everything of substance here was done because some 
one took the time to do it and it was never because some one 
asked on forum. And second some people have such a feeling of 
entitlement of other people time. No you do not have a right to 
tell me how I should spend my free time. People do not react well 
when they are treated almost like slaves by a master.

There is another type of comment we call drive by commenting when 
some usually never seen before post a post that can be boiled 
down to "D is not perfect because you are idiots". Good thing is 
that they usually dont stay for long.


> I haven't seen Chris doing any of that in this thread. Doesn't 
> he acknowledge issues people feel strongly about?
First I and other person recognized that his post here was out of 
character and I had in mind his behavior over period of time. 
Second I was talking about how other people coming here go "why 
the F#$k its so negative here.



> I felt that Manu was being dismissed while his arguments for 
> where D should head were spot on.
Could you elaborate. What Manu usually wants is quick fixes fast 
and that is the wrong way of building a programming language. 
Before any change is committed to the language it should be 
thoroughly studies otherwise you will get a mess.


> "against the person". Anyway, Chris can handle it... but going 
> personal does not build a good culture and does not encourage 
> lurkers to participate.
Thats not even 1% how he treats others. If he behaved the same in 
Rust community he would have been banned long time ago.

> People might stay and deicide to advocate for change if they 
> perceive that other have had the same problems as they have.
This presupposes that the reason they have a problems is because 
some people have different opinion or values. In D's case 99% of 
all problems are due to lack of resources so advocating for 
change will have 0 results. To cure a disease you first need to 
correctly identify a cause.


>
> But the dichotomy isn't false... and heavily relying on the GC 
> has probably held D back from taking the position Rust is 
> getting now...
If dichotomy isn't false then answer weather D is high or low 
level language? The dichotomy exist for other languages because 
of their design limitations not because of some lows of nature.

All languages that became popular did so because of some big 
backer. It would be mistake to conclude that language X became 
popular because of feature Y so we should also have feature Y and 
we too become popular.

> So it isn't realistic to think that D can keep up with those at 
> this point in time.
D is still on exponential growth curve.