4 ms·

You also need to take history into account - non-free compiler - GC (when Java, C#, etc already ate into that C++ segment - competing standard libraries The

by epage 3y ago

You also need to take history into account - non-free compiler - GC (when Java, C#, etc already ate into that C++ segment - competing standard libraries These have been solved in different ways but diseminating that knowledge and changing people's gut feels is hard. Its then made more difficult by competitors coming out before overcoming this (e.g. Rust)

nindalf 3y ago
Missteps are fine if it’s possible to make a compelling pitch to a pragmatist in pain. But was there ever such a pitch? Not that I recall.
dejan_lekic 3y ago
Check the year when David announced D support in GCC - https://forum.dlang.org/post/c3mnst$2htg$1@digitaldaemon.com https://forum.dlang.org/post/c3mnst$2htg$1@digitaldaemon.com . So yes, you might be right about non-free compiler until 2004. GC - you can build entire application _without_ GC. Nobody forces you to do that. Competing standard libraries are thing in the past after the Tango project has been abandoned. So really, what are you talking about?
- epage 3y ago
  I acknowledged that in my comment. My point is it takes a lot of work to undo the damage to people's perception and that time you lose from doing so gets your community that much further behind.
- htoadfwq 3y ago
  > GC - you can build entire application _without_ GC. Nobody forces you to do that. This is a gross misrepresentation. With D you must opt-out and be cognizant of libs they may or may not require GC. > Competing standard libraries are thing in the past after the Tango project has been abandoned. We are discussing why D failed adoption where the history and past are INCREDIBLY important factors. So really, what are you talking about?
  - WalterBright 3y ago
    It is not necessary to opt-out of the GC. Just don't use it. If the @nogc attribute is used, the compiler will tell you where the gc is used.
    - orangeboats 3y ago
      My hot take: when D intends to compete with C++, having an opt-out GC is a deadly disadvantage. It is difficult to prove to the performance-oriented people that GC'ed languages can be performant, and years of JVM stop-the-world GC didn't help to improve the reputation of GCs either. Even though D has @nogc, non-D programmers would probably have serious reservations as to whether the ecosystem is split between GCed and GCless, and how much that split would affect them and their project. IMO, Rust did it quite right in this regard by making GC opt-in (with rust-gc) - although borrow checking is an imperfect way of doing safe memory management (eg. cyclic references), the fact that it attempts to be a "safer C++ at no runtime cost" certainly has pulled some people over.
      - WalterBright 3y ago
        The whole GC thing is a non-issue to a pragmatic programmer. D's GC is not going to pop out and smite your program. It's just one of many methods of dealing with memory that D provides. The "serious reservations" is simply unfamiliarity. The GC has uses where it shines. Allocating data structures that last the lifetime of the program instance. Enabling data allocation during Compile Time Function Execution. Scripting programs. Borrow checking has its costs, too. Some data structures won't work with it. Sometimes to conform to it means allocating an extra copy. Some code has to be marked as unsafe. D has a borrow checker, too. It's opt-in, though.

by epage 3y ago

nindalf 3y ago

Missteps are fine if it’s possible to make a compelling pitch to a pragmatist in pain. But was there ever such a pitch? Not that I recall.

dejan_lekic 3y ago

Check the year when David announced D support in GCC - https://forum.dlang.org/post/c3mnst$2htg$1@digitaldaemon.com https://forum.dlang.org/post/c3mnst$2htg$1@digitaldaemon.com . So yes, you might be right about non-free compiler until 2004. GC - you can build entire application _without_ GC. Nobody forces you to do that. Competing standard libraries are thing in the past after the Tango project has been abandoned. So really, what are you talking about?

epage 3y ago
I acknowledged that in my comment. My point is it takes a lot of work to undo the damage to people's perception and that time you lose from doing so gets your community that much further behind.
htoadfwq 3y ago
> GC - you can build entire application _without_ GC. Nobody forces you to do that. This is a gross misrepresentation. With D you must opt-out and be cognizant of libs they may or may not require GC. > Competing standard libraries are thing in the past after the Tango project has been abandoned. We are discussing why D failed adoption where the history and past are INCREDIBLY important factors. So really, what are you talking about?
- WalterBright 3y ago
  It is not necessary to opt-out of the GC. Just don't use it. If the @nogc attribute is used, the compiler will tell you where the gc is used.
  - orangeboats 3y ago
    My hot take: when D intends to compete with C++, having an opt-out GC is a deadly disadvantage. It is difficult to prove to the performance-oriented people that GC'ed languages can be performant, and years of JVM stop-the-world GC didn't help to improve the reputation of GCs either. Even though D has @nogc, non-D programmers would probably have serious reservations as to whether the ecosystem is split between GCed and GCless, and how much that split would affect them and their project. IMO, Rust did it quite right in this regard by making GC opt-in (with rust-gc) - although borrow checking is an imperfect way of doing safe memory management (eg. cyclic references), the fact that it attempts to be a "safer C++ at no runtime cost" certainly has pulled some people over.
    - WalterBright 3y ago
      The whole GC thing is a non-issue to a pragmatic programmer. D's GC is not going to pop out and smite your program. It's just one of many methods of dealing with memory that D provides. The "serious reservations" is simply unfamiliarity. The GC has uses where it shines. Allocating data structures that last the lifetime of the program instance. Enabling data allocation during Compile Time Function Execution. Scripting programs. Borrow checking has its costs, too. Some data structures won't work with it. Sometimes to conform to it means allocating an extra copy. Some code has to be marked as unsafe. D has a borrow checker, too. It's opt-in, though.