3 ms·

> * Provides no evidence... I'd go further and say it provides the opposite - it shows a low and declining search trend. The rest of it is a fairly sloppy gui

> * Provides no evidence... I'd go further and say it provides the opposite - it shows a low and declining search trend. The rest of it is a fairly sloppy guide on how to set up Atom for D development. Seems to have been written just to have an excuse to make that puerile joke.

geezerjay 8y ago
> I'd go further and say it provides the opposite - it shows a low and declining search trend. This. Additionally, the only moment in time when D was a reasonable concept was before C++11, when the development of C++ was stalled and there were a few pain points with C++98 that justified picking up other tools. Since then C++ started evolving and a majority of those pain points were addressed, thus leaving D without any major selling point or even purpose. To make matters worse, with the whole industry shift to the web C+ has since seen a decline in market share. Therefore D is placed as a poor replacement for the incumbent of a market share in decline.
- philwelch 8y ago
  > Additionally, the only moment in time when D was a reasonable concept was before C++11, when the development of C++ was stalled and there were a few pain points with C++98 that justified picking up other tools. I don't know enough about D to dispute this, but in a backhanded way, this is a pretty damning appraisal of D. It's not just the "industry shift to the web" that has led to the decline of C++. Why do people write server-side applications in Java or Go instead of C++? Why do people write mobile apps in Objective-C, Java, or Swift instead of C++? Even in the remaining domain of desktop applications and systems code, C++ isn't necessarily the go-to choice anymore. And so, if D doesn't offer anything over C++ that couldn't be addressed by bolting even more features onto C++, why the heck does it exist?

3 ms·

> * Provides no evidence... I'd go further and say it provides the opposite - it shows a low and declining search trend. The rest of it is a fairly sloppy gui

by scrumper 8y ago

geezerjay 8y ago
> I'd go further and say it provides the opposite - it shows a low and declining search trend. This. Additionally, the only moment in time when D was a reasonable concept was before C++11, when the development of C++ was stalled and there were a few pain points with C++98 that justified picking up other tools. Since then C++ started evolving and a majority of those pain points were addressed, thus leaving D without any major selling point or even purpose. To make matters worse, with the whole industry shift to the web C+ has since seen a decline in market share. Therefore D is placed as a poor replacement for the incumbent of a market share in decline.
- philwelch 8y ago
  > Additionally, the only moment in time when D was a reasonable concept was before C++11, when the development of C++ was stalled and there were a few pain points with C++98 that justified picking up other tools. I don't know enough about D to dispute this, but in a backhanded way, this is a pretty damning appraisal of D. It's not just the "industry shift to the web" that has led to the decline of C++. Why do people write server-side applications in Java or Go instead of C++? Why do people write mobile apps in Objective-C, Java, or Swift instead of C++? Even in the remaining domain of desktop applications and systems code, C++ isn't necessarily the go-to choice anymore. And so, if D doesn't offer anything over C++ that couldn't be addressed by bolting even more features onto C++, why the heck does it exist?