www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

D - D wish list for 2004

reply Mark T <Mark_member pathlink.com> writes:
I really only have 1

1) That the D language version 1.0 is finalized and released in 2004. The window
of opportunity closes a little each year for getting a new language off the
ground and adopted by a decent sized developer community so it doesn't die a
premature death.  I can't use it at work unless it becomes popular.
Dec 31 2003
next sibling parent "Matthew" <matthew.hat stlsoft.dot.org> writes:
"Mark T" <Mark_member pathlink.com> wrote in message
news:bsvo4b$2ilg$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 I really only have 1

 1) That the D language version 1.0 is finalized and released in 2004. The

 of opportunity closes a little each year for getting a new language off

 ground and adopted by a decent sized developer community so it doesn't die

 premature death.  I can't use it at work unless it becomes popular.

I for one will be very surprised if that does not happen
Dec 31 2003
prev sibling next sibling parent reply "Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> writes:
"Mark T" <Mark_member pathlink.com> wrote in message
news:bsvo4b$2ilg$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 I really only have 1

 1) That the D language version 1.0 is finalized and released in 2004. The

 of opportunity closes a little each year for getting a new language off

 ground and adopted by a decent sized developer community so it doesn't die

 premature death.  I can't use it at work unless it becomes popular.

I think it's pretty close. I'm finishing up what I hope will be the last bit of new features, and then it'll be bug fixing. D 1.0 will probably be the most powerful 1.0 language ever released!
Jan 01 2004
next sibling parent reply Marco A <Marco_member pathlink.com> writes:
Would people be interested in creating a comp.lang.d usenet group to
approximately correspond with the 1.0 release?

The process is a little involved, so I won't do it unless a majority of people
here are in support and will in turn vote for it on the usenet. This potenially
would allow a larger audience and make things easier to seach for. The down-side
is group spam. I was thinking that the general D language could be discussed in
comp.lang.d and DMD compiler issues would remain in this group.

http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/faqs/big-eight.html

Marco


In article <bt0vff$17ev$1 digitaldaemon.com>, Walter says...
"Mark T" <Mark_member pathlink.com> wrote in message
news:bsvo4b$2ilg$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 I really only have 1

 1) That the D language version 1.0 is finalized and released in 2004. The

 of opportunity closes a little each year for getting a new language off

 ground and adopted by a decent sized developer community so it doesn't die

 premature death.  I can't use it at work unless it becomes popular.

I think it's pretty close. I'm finishing up what I hope will be the last bit of new features, and then it'll be bug fixing. D 1.0 will probably be the most powerful 1.0 language ever released!

Jan 06 2004
next sibling parent reply "Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> writes:
I'll vote for it!

"Marco A" <Marco_member pathlink.com> wrote in message
news:btfkfk$2bs2$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 Would people be interested in creating a comp.lang.d usenet group to
 approximately correspond with the 1.0 release?

 The process is a little involved, so I won't do it unless a majority of

 here are in support and will in turn vote for it on the usenet. This

 would allow a larger audience and make things easier to seach for. The

 is group spam. I was thinking that the general D language could be

 comp.lang.d and DMD compiler issues would remain in this group.

 http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/faqs/big-eight.html

 Marco


 In article <bt0vff$17ev$1 digitaldaemon.com>, Walter says...
"Mark T" <Mark_member pathlink.com> wrote in message
news:bsvo4b$2ilg$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 I really only have 1

 1) That the D language version 1.0 is finalized and released in 2004.



window
 of opportunity closes a little each year for getting a new language off

 ground and adopted by a decent sized developer community so it doesn't



a
 premature death.  I can't use it at work unless it becomes popular.

I think it's pretty close. I'm finishing up what I hope will be the last


of new features, and then it'll be bug fixing. D 1.0 will probably be the
most powerful 1.0 language ever released!


Jan 06 2004
parent reply Mark T <Mark_member pathlink.com> writes:
Can someone setup a website where we could try a practice vote (essentially to
see how many potential yes votes we have), of course people could vote more than
once on a website. 

For the real vote we could recruit friends and neighbors.
Jan 09 2004
parent "Matthew" <matthew.hat stlsoft.dot.org> writes:
"Mark T" <Mark_member pathlink.com> wrote in message
news:btntn2$30bf$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 Can someone setup a website where we could try a practice vote

 see how many potential yes votes we have), of course people could vote

 once on a website.

 For the real vote we could recruit friends and neighbors.

I could rustle up a handful of people.
Jan 09 2004
prev sibling next sibling parent reply "KTC" <me here.com> writes:
"Marco A" wrote...
 Would people be interested in creating a comp.lang.d usenet group to
 approximately correspond with the 1.0 release?

 The process is a little involved, so I won't do it unless a majority

 here are in support and will in turn vote for it on the usenet. This

 would allow a larger audience and make things easier to seach for.

 is group spam. I was thinking that the general D language could be

 comp.lang.d and DMD compiler issues would remain in this group.

 http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/faqs/big-eight.html

Sure. It'll increase visibility and subsequently more user and etc etc... But as you obviously know, don't bother unless you're sure we can get enough votes for it. That will probably required all the people here willing (and actually do when the time comes) to vote yes for it plus possibly some more.... KTC -- Experience is a good school but the fees are high. - Heinrich Heine
Jan 07 2004
parent reply Georg Wrede <Georg_member pathlink.com> writes:
In article <bthf50$25e3$1 digitaldaemon.com>, KTC says...
"Marco A" wrote...
 Would people be interested in creating a comp.lang.d usenet group to
 approximately correspond with the 1.0 release?

But as you obviously know, don't bother unless you're sure we can get enough votes for it. That will probably required all the people here willing (and actually do when the time comes) to vote yes for it plus possibly some more....

I think this would also reduce clutter here, move some of the newbie questions out of here, give more credibility to the language, etc. I'm pretty sure everyone here would vote for the newsgroup! Just tell us when and where to vote, when it's time! BTW, how many votes does one need nowadays?
Jan 07 2004
next sibling parent "Matthew" <matthew.hat stlsoft.dot.org> writes:
I say go for it, as long as Walter does not have any objections.

It'd be nice if we could get comp.lang.d, D 1.0, and one or two other things
(a journal, perhaps) all going before the middle of the year.

"Georg Wrede" <Georg_member pathlink.com> wrote in message
news:bti17o$1bo$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 In article <bthf50$25e3$1 digitaldaemon.com>, KTC says...
"Marco A" wrote...
 Would people be interested in creating a comp.lang.d usenet group to
 approximately correspond with the 1.0 release?

But as you obviously know, don't bother unless you're sure we can get enough votes for it. That will probably required all the people here willing (and actually do when the time comes) to vote yes for it plus possibly some more....

I think this would also reduce clutter here, move some of the newbie questions out of here, give more credibility to the language, etc. I'm pretty sure everyone here would vote for the newsgroup! Just tell us when and where to vote, when it's time! BTW, how many votes does one need nowadays?

Jan 07 2004
prev sibling parent "KTC" <me here.com> writes:
"Georg Wrede" wrote...
 BTW, how many votes does one need nowadays?

"Each separate proposed change will be considered to have passed if and only if it received at least 100 more YES than NO votes and received at least twice as many YES as NO votes."
Jan 07 2004
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Damon Gray <dontbotherasking go.away.mr.bad.spammer.net> writes:
Good idea!

I would definitely vote for it if I could. What is also nice about 
getting it into "The big eight" is that it will be indexed and 
searchable via "groups.google.com". This will make the spam problem 
negligible because results will be searched for not browsed. I would 
start the process as soon as possible. If it doesn't work out digtalmars 
can put there news server into the larger usenet feed and then it can be 
added into google.

Marco A wrote:
 Would people be interested in creating a comp.lang.d usenet group to
 approximately correspond with the 1.0 release?
 
 The process is a little involved, so I won't do it unless a majority of people
 here are in support and will in turn vote for it on the usenet. This potenially
 would allow a larger audience and make things easier to seach for. The
down-side
 is group spam. I was thinking that the general D language could be discussed in
 comp.lang.d and DMD compiler issues would remain in this group.
 
 http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/faqs/big-eight.html
 
 Marco
 
 
 In article <bt0vff$17ev$1 digitaldaemon.com>, Walter says...
 
"Mark T" <Mark_member pathlink.com> wrote in message
news:bsvo4b$2ilg$1 digitaldaemon.com...

I really only have 1

1) That the D language version 1.0 is finalized and released in 2004. The

window
of opportunity closes a little each year for getting a new language off

the
ground and adopted by a decent sized developer community so it doesn't die

a
premature death.  I can't use it at work unless it becomes popular.

I think it's pretty close. I'm finishing up what I hope will be the last bit of new features, and then it'll be bug fixing. D 1.0 will probably be the most powerful 1.0 language ever released!


Jan 07 2004
next sibling parent reply "KTC" <me here.com> writes:
"Damon Gray" wrote...
 Good idea!

 I would definitely vote for it if I could. What is also nice about
 getting it into "The big eight" is that it will be indexed and
 searchable via "groups.google.com". This will make the spam problem
 negligible because results will be searched for not browsed. I would
 start the process as soon as possible. If it doesn't work out

 can put there news server into the larger usenet feed and then it

 added into google.

If you can't make it into the Big-8, then you can of course create it in Alt. But I would say having it inside the Big-8 would be a lot better in promoting the language to the programming community as a whole... KTC -- Experience is a good school but the fees are high. - Heinrich Heine
Jan 07 2004
next sibling parent reply "Matthew" <matthew.hat stlsoft.dot.org> writes:
"KTC" <me here.com> wrote in message news:bti7kk$bp7$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 "Damon Gray" wrote...
 Good idea!

 I would definitely vote for it if I could. What is also nice about
 getting it into "The big eight" is that it will be indexed and
 searchable via "groups.google.com". This will make the spam problem
 negligible because results will be searched for not browsed. I would
 start the process as soon as possible. If it doesn't work out

 can put there news server into the larger usenet feed and then it

 added into google.

If you can't make it into the Big-8, then you can of course create it in Alt. But I would say having it inside the Big-8 would be a lot better in promoting the language to the programming community as a whole...

I would say the whole thing or nothing. I wouldn't vote for it to go into alt, if it doesn't get in the Big-9
Jan 07 2004
parent "KTC" <me here.com> writes:
"Matthew" wrote...
 I would say the whole thing or nothing. I wouldn't vote for it to go

 alt, if it doesn't get in the Big-9

One don't actually have to vote for the creation of an Alt. group. But then I do agree with you that either in comp.lang.* or nothing...
Jan 08 2004
prev sibling parent reply "Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> writes:
"KTC" <me here.com> wrote in message news:bti7kk$bp7$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 If you can't make it into the Big-8, then you can of course create it
 in Alt.
 But I would say having it inside the Big-8 would be a lot better in
 promoting the language to the programming community as a whole...

I'm not too keen on the idea of an alt group. D belongs in comp.lang.d, and if that doesn't happen, we should keep it here until it does happen.
Jan 09 2004
parent reply "Matthew" <matthew.hat stlsoft.dot.org> writes:
"Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> wrote in message
news:btntg8$303u$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 "KTC" <me here.com> wrote in message

 If you can't make it into the Big-8, then you can of course create it
 in Alt.
 But I would say having it inside the Big-8 would be a lot better in
 promoting the language to the programming community as a whole...

I'm not too keen on the idea of an alt group. D belongs in comp.lang.d,

 if that doesn't happen, we should keep it here until it does happen.

I won't be visiting alt.*.D.
Jan 09 2004
parent reply "Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> writes:
"Matthew" <matthew.hat stlsoft.dot.org> wrote in message
news:btnum5$9t$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 "Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> wrote in message
 news:btntg8$303u$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 "KTC" <me here.com> wrote in message

 If you can't make it into the Big-8, then you can of course create it
 in Alt.
 But I would say having it inside the Big-8 would be a lot better in
 promoting the language to the programming community as a whole...

I'm not too keen on the idea of an alt group. D belongs in comp.lang.d,

 if that doesn't happen, we should keep it here until it does happen.

I won't be visiting alt.*.D.

Should rename "alt" to "purgatory" <g>.
Jan 09 2004
parent "KTC" <me here.com> writes:
"Walter" wrote...
 Should rename "alt" to "purgatory" <g>.

LOL. Don't worry, I was just saying that I could not that one should :-)
Jan 10 2004
prev sibling next sibling parent Marco A <Marco_member pathlink.com> writes:
In article <3FFC641C.5030704 go.away.mr.bad.spammer.net>, Damon Gray says...
Good idea!

I would definitely vote for it if I could. What is also nice about 
getting it into "The big eight" is that it will be indexed and 
searchable via "groups.google.com". This will make the spam problem 
negligible because results will be searched for not browsed. I would 
start the process as soon as possible. If it doesn't work out digtalmars 
can put there news server into the larger usenet feed and then it can be 
added into google.

I tried to found out how but was given a catch-22 instead.
Jan 07 2004
prev sibling parent "Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> writes:
"Damon Gray" <dontbotherasking go.away.mr.bad.spammer.net> wrote in message
news:3FFC641C.5030704 go.away.mr.bad.spammer.net...
  If it doesn't work out digtalmars
 can put there news server into the larger usenet feed and then it can be
 added into google.

How does that work?
Jan 09 2004
prev sibling next sibling parent "C" <dont respond.com> writes:
got my vote :).

C
"Marco A" <Marco_member pathlink.com> wrote in message
news:btfkfk$2bs2$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 Would people be interested in creating a comp.lang.d usenet group to
 approximately correspond with the 1.0 release?

 The process is a little involved, so I won't do it unless a majority of

 here are in support and will in turn vote for it on the usenet. This

 would allow a larger audience and make things easier to seach for. The

 is group spam. I was thinking that the general D language could be

 comp.lang.d and DMD compiler issues would remain in this group.

 http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/faqs/big-eight.html

 Marco


 In article <bt0vff$17ev$1 digitaldaemon.com>, Walter says...
"Mark T" <Mark_member pathlink.com> wrote in message
news:bsvo4b$2ilg$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 I really only have 1

 1) That the D language version 1.0 is finalized and released in 2004.



window
 of opportunity closes a little each year for getting a new language off

 ground and adopted by a decent sized developer community so it doesn't



a
 premature death.  I can't use it at work unless it becomes popular.

I think it's pretty close. I'm finishing up what I hope will be the last


of new features, and then it'll be bug fixing. D 1.0 will probably be the
most powerful 1.0 language ever released!


Jan 08 2004
prev sibling parent reply J Anderson <REMOVEanderson badmama.com.au> writes:
Marco A wrote:

Would people be interested in creating a comp.lang.d usenet group to
approximately correspond with the 1.0 release?

The process is a little involved, so I won't do it unless a majority of people
here are in support and will in turn vote for it on the usenet. This potenially
would allow a larger audience and make things easier to seach for. The down-side
is group spam. I was thinking that the general D language could be discussed in
comp.lang.d and DMD compiler issues would remain in this group.

http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/faqs/big-eight.html

Marco

  

in this group? I wonder if any of the die hard C fans would vote against?
Jan 09 2004
parent reply J C Calvarese <jcc7 cox.net> writes:
J Anderson wrote:

 Marco A wrote:
 
 Would people be interested in creating a comp.lang.d usenet group to
 approximately correspond with the 1.0 release?

 The process is a little involved, so I won't do it unless a majority 
 of people
 here are in support and will in turn vote for it on the usenet. This 
 potenially
 would allow a larger audience and make things easier to seach for. The 
 down-side
 is group spam. I was thinking that the general D language could be 
 discussed in
 comp.lang.d and DMD compiler issues would remain in this group.

 http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/faqs/big-eight.html

 Marco

  

in this group?

Walter would have a better idea than most of us since he can count how many download occur when a new version is released. (Of course I hope he factors in that some people might download the same release multiple times to put on different computers.) I'm confident that there are many people the are fans of D (and would be inclined to support D with a vote) that simply aren't inclined to post many messages here.
 I wonder if any of the die hard C fans would vote against?
 

Then I subscribed to news:news.announce.newgroups and reading the posts sheds a little light about voting process on recent proposals: Date Group Yes No A I 2003/11/25 misc.invest.bonds 52 12 3 1 (failed) 2003/11/25 misc.metric-system 211 25 6 3 (passed) 2003/12/09 news.admin.parliament 23 98 8 3 (failed) 2003/12/15 comp.databases.etl 41 13 3 2 (failed) "A" is abstaining and "I" is invalid. It's a small sample, so you shouldn't give much weight to my musings, but I do want to make some guess about how this might work for D The parliament group idea looked like it might have annoyed some people, so I don't think we would expect 98 votes against a D group. I'd guess that 10-25 people might vote against (but of course everyone should welcome a D group). -- Justin http://jcc_7.tripod.com/d/
Jan 09 2004
parent reply "Matthew" <matthew.hat stlsoft.dot.org> writes:
 J Anderson wrote:

 Marco A wrote:

 Would people be interested in creating a comp.lang.d usenet group to
 approximately correspond with the 1.0 release?

 The process is a little involved, so I won't do it unless a majority
 of people
 here are in support and will in turn vote for it on the usenet. This
 potenially
 would allow a larger audience and make things easier to seach for. The
 down-side
 is group spam. I was thinking that the general D language could be
 discussed in
 comp.lang.d and DMD compiler issues would remain in this group.

 http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/faqs/big-eight.html

 Marco

in this group?

Walter would have a better idea than most of us since he can count how many download occur when a new version is released. (Of course I hope he factors in that some people might download the same release multiple times to put on different computers.) I'm confident that there are many people the are fans of D (and would be inclined to support D with a vote) that simply aren't inclined to post many messages here.
 I wonder if any of the die hard C fans would vote against?

Then I subscribed to news:news.announce.newgroups and reading the posts sheds a little light about voting process on recent proposals: Date Group Yes No A I 2003/11/25 misc.invest.bonds 52 12 3 1 (failed) 2003/11/25 misc.metric-system 211 25 6 3 (passed) 2003/12/09 news.admin.parliament 23 98 8 3 (failed) 2003/12/15 comp.databases.etl 41 13 3 2 (failed) "A" is abstaining and "I" is invalid. It's a small sample, so you shouldn't give much weight to my musings, but I do want to make some guess about how this might work for D The parliament group idea looked like it might have annoyed some people, so I don't think we would expect 98 votes against a D group. I'd guess that 10-25 people might vote against (but of course everyone should welcome a D group).

I hope you're right, but it seems optimistic to me. Judging from the amount of heat Walter was copping a couple of months ago on c.l.c.m, there'd be quite a few Nos on D. I think we'd need a well coordinated countdown on the D NG, so that everyone who's inclined would not forget to add their vote.
Jan 09 2004
next sibling parent reply Georg Wrede <Georg_member pathlink.com> writes:
In article <btnii9$2f79$1 digitaldaemon.com>, Matthew says...
 J Anderson wrote:

 Marco A wrote:

 Would people be interested in creating a comp.lang.d usenet group to
 approximately correspond with the 1.0 release?




Would it be a good idea to try a test vote right here? We could ask everybody, including the people who don't usually write here, to cast a yes/no vote for their contribution to the c.l newsgroup?
Jan 09 2004
parent reply "Matthew" <matthew.hat stlsoft.dot.org> writes:
"Georg Wrede" <Georg_member pathlink.com> wrote in message
news:btnkm8$2imu$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 In article <btnii9$2f79$1 digitaldaemon.com>, Matthew says...
 J Anderson wrote:

 Marco A wrote:

 Would people be interested in creating a comp.lang.d usenet group to
 approximately correspond with the 1.0 release?




Would it be a good idea to try a test vote right here? We could ask

 including the people who don't usually write here, to cast a yes/no vote

 their contribution to the c.l newsgroup?

Sure. Why not? But surely we're in for a 99+% response, aren't we?
Jan 09 2004
parent reply J Anderson <REMOVEanderson badmama.com.au> writes:
Matthew wrote:

"Georg Wrede" <Georg_member pathlink.com> wrote in message
news:btnkm8$2imu$1 digitaldaemon.com...
  

In article <btnii9$2f79$1 digitaldaemon.com>, Matthew says...
    

J Anderson wrote:

        

Marco A wrote:

          

Would people be interested in creating a comp.lang.d usenet group to
approximately correspond with the 1.0 release?
            





including the people who don't usually write here, to cast a yes/no vote
    

their contribution to the c.l newsgroup?
    

Sure. Why not? But surely we're in for a 99+% response, aren't we?

good idea to see how many potential votes we'll get.
Jan 09 2004
parent "Matthew" <matthew.hat stlsoft.dot.org> writes:
"J Anderson" <REMOVEanderson badmama.com.au> wrote in message
news:btnu23$30nq$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 Matthew wrote:

"Georg Wrede" <Georg_member pathlink.com> wrote in message
news:btnkm8$2imu$1 digitaldaemon.com...


In article <btnii9$2f79$1 digitaldaemon.com>, Matthew says...


J Anderson wrote:



Marco A wrote:



Would people be interested in creating a comp.lang.d usenet group to
approximately correspond with the 1.0 release?





including the people who don't usually write here, to cast a yes/no vote

their contribution to the c.l newsgroup?

Sure. Why not? But surely we're in for a 99+% response, aren't we?

good idea to see how many potential votes we'll get.

Good point. Let's do it.
Jan 09 2004
prev sibling next sibling parent Mark T <Mark_member pathlink.com> writes:
I hope you're right, but it seems optimistic to me. Judging from the amount
of heat Walter was copping a couple of months ago on c.l.c.m, there'd be
quite a few Nos on D.

We don't have to advertize on c.l.c.m maybe comp.lang.misc plus the required ones
I think we'd need a well coordinated countdown on the D NG, so that everyone
who's inclined would not forget to add their vote.

I agree, it would be nice to see at least 250 votes in favor. It looks like low turn-out killed most of the above groups.
Jan 09 2004
prev sibling parent reply "Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> writes:
"Matthew" <matthew.hat stlsoft.dot.org> wrote in message
news:btnii9$2f79$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 I think we'd need a well coordinated countdown on the D NG, so that

 who's inclined would not forget to add their vote.

I'd like to wait until after SDWest, and 1.0 is released (early March). That would give us our best shot.
Jan 09 2004
next sibling parent "Matthew" <matthew.hat stlsoft.dot.org> writes:
"Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> wrote in message
news:btntg9$303u$2 digitaldaemon.com...
 "Matthew" <matthew.hat stlsoft.dot.org> wrote in message
 news:btnii9$2f79$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 I think we'd need a well coordinated countdown on the D NG, so that

 who's inclined would not forget to add their vote.

I'd like to wait until after SDWest, and 1.0 is released (early March).

 would give us our best shot.

Fine by me
Jan 09 2004
prev sibling parent reply "KTC" <me here.com> writes:
"Walter" wrote...
 I'd like to wait until after SDWest, and 1.0 is released (early

 would give us our best shot.

Sure, the whole process takes about 2-3 months anyway. You just decide when it is the best timing for submitting a formal proposal & then the PQ for the actual votes... The formal proposal need to be work on first anyway so we can do that in the mean time. However this community try to promote it when the time comes (i.e. telling people how/when to vote etc.), just need to make sure there will be no violation of any of the "Guidelines for Big Eight Newsgroup Creation". Namely one of the most important being: "The explicit voting instructions in the CFV may not be distributed, in whole or in part, to any forum, by anyone except the votetaker. People wishing to vote should be referred to the CFV posted in news.announce.newgroups or told to contact the votetaker for a copy. Violations may result in invalidation of votes by the votetaker or long-term suspension of the proposal by the n.a.n moderation team." KTC -- Experience is a good school but the fees are high. - Heinrich Heine
Jan 10 2004
parent reply "Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> writes:
"KTC" <me here.com> wrote in message news:btp7sf$23dq$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 "Walter" wrote...
 I'd like to wait until after SDWest, and 1.0 is released (early

Sure, the whole process takes about 2-3 months anyway. You just decide when it is the best timing for submitting a formal proposal & then the PQ for the actual votes... The formal proposal need to be work on first anyway so we can do that in the mean time.

Ok, let's do it.
 However this community try to promote it when the time comes (i.e.
 telling people how/when to vote etc.), just need to make sure there
 will be no violation of any of the "Guidelines for Big Eight Newsgroup
 Creation". Namely one of the most important being:

     "The explicit voting instructions in the CFV may not be
 distributed, in whole or in part, to any forum, by anyone except the
 votetaker. People wishing to vote should be referred to the CFV posted
 in news.announce.newgroups or told to contact the votetaker for a
 copy. Violations may result in invalidation of votes by the votetaker
 or long-term suspension of the proposal by the n.a.n moderation team."

And we'll do it by the book!
Jan 10 2004
parent reply "Matthew" <matthew.hat stlsoft.dot.org> writes:
"Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> wrote in message
news:btpmol$303c$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 "KTC" <me here.com> wrote in message

 "Walter" wrote...
 I'd like to wait until after SDWest, and 1.0 is released (early

Sure, the whole process takes about 2-3 months anyway. You just decide when it is the best timing for submitting a formal proposal & then the PQ for the actual votes... The formal proposal need to be work on first anyway so we can do that in the mean time.

Ok, let's do it.
 However this community try to promote it when the time comes (i.e.
 telling people how/when to vote etc.), just need to make sure there
 will be no violation of any of the "Guidelines for Big Eight Newsgroup
 Creation". Namely one of the most important being:

     "The explicit voting instructions in the CFV may not be
 distributed, in whole or in part, to any forum, by anyone except the
 votetaker. People wishing to vote should be referred to the CFV posted
 in news.announce.newgroups or told to contact the votetaker for a
 copy. Violations may result in invalidation of votes by the votetaker
 or long-term suspension of the proposal by the n.a.n moderation team."

And we'll do it by the book!

I must be thick or something. I failed to grok how one might fall foul of the process.
Jan 10 2004
parent "KTC" <me here.com> writes:
"Matthew" wrote...
     "The explicit voting instructions in the CFV may not be
 distributed, in whole or in part, to any forum, by anyone except



 votetaker. People wishing to vote should be referred to the CFV



 in news.announce.newgroups or told to contact the votetaker for



 copy. Violations may result in invalidation of votes by the



 or long-term suspension of the proposal by the n.a.n moderation



 And we'll do it by the book!

I must be thick or something. I failed to grok how one might fall

 the process.

Ah you usually won't, but people could get overly excited sometimes with trying to get other people to vote that they post in newsgroups or mailing list the instructions of how to vote etc... Anyway, now that decided we're going to do it, need to sort out whos actually going to work on the formal proposal etc. Marco??
Jan 11 2004
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Georg Wrede <Georg_member pathlink.com> writes:
In article <bt0vff$17ev$1 digitaldaemon.com>, Walter says...
"Mark T" <Mark_member pathlink.com> wrote in message
 I really only have 1
 1) That the D language version 1.0 is finalized and released in 2004.

of new features, and then it'll be bug fixing. D 1.0 will probably be the most powerful 1.0 language ever released!

I think that the notion about the closing window is valid. We might not see today what all will contribute to closing the window, but "just because I'm paranoid, doesn't mean they're not out to get us". I also agree on that this just might be one of the most powerful 1.0 language releases ever! However, I had a dream the other week about walking the halls of the KDE development team. (As if they'd have a building of their own.) I tried to convince them to switch to D. The counter argument was that they'd never switch to a language where the specs are alive. They just couldn't afford it. So, should we make a promise to keep the March specs, until at least December? We could have a separate track where we do development and debugging, or we could have a Linux like scheme were only the even releases are for users. Actually, what is _really_ important is to have a fixed spec around March. Whether the compiler is perfectly debugged or completely up to the spec is of secondary importance. That can always be fixed during the summer. But a _really solid_ spec is what we should publish in March.
Jan 09 2004
parent "Matthew" <matthew.hat stlsoft.dot.org> writes:
"Georg Wrede" <Georg_member pathlink.com> wrote in message
news:btnkai$2i30$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 In article <bt0vff$17ev$1 digitaldaemon.com>, Walter says...
"Mark T" <Mark_member pathlink.com> wrote in message
 I really only have 1
 1) That the D language version 1.0 is finalized and released in 2004.



of new features, and then it'll be bug fixing. D 1.0 will probably be the
most powerful 1.0 language ever released!

I think that the notion about the closing window is valid. We might not see today what all will contribute to closing the window, but "just because I'm paranoid, doesn't mean they're not out to get us".

I think you'll find that there are a lot more people with "hand" watching D than can be guessed from the NG participation. I know that people are interested in the articles that Walter and I've been doing, and are also interested in the idea of The D Journal. If we make a go of it, we might spark interest and/or support in all manner of unimagined places. Let's hope everyone can contribute ideas and articles over the next month or two, and we can start with a splash.
Jan 09 2004
prev sibling parent reply Matthias Becker <Matthias_member pathlink.com> writes:
I think it's pretty close. I'm finishing up what I hope will be the last bit
of new features, and then it'll be bug fixing. D 1.0 will probably be the
most powerful 1.0 language ever released!

There is no C++-Standard before C++98. So this is version 1.0 and it's still more powerfull that D.
Jan 11 2004
next sibling parent Georg Wrede <Georg_member pathlink.com> writes:
In article <btrvl0$h33$1 digitaldaemon.com>, Matthias Becker says...
D 1.0 will probably be the most powerful 1.0 language ever released!

There is no C++-Standard before C++98. So this is version 1.0 and it's still more powerfull that D.

You're mixing things. It'll be years before we get to ISO-D 1.0. That may actually be more powerful than e.g. C++98. At least we hope, and believe it will be. But a v1.0 here is just a spec, and as such comparable to C++ at Stroustrup's Cfront days.
Jan 11 2004
prev sibling parent reply "Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> writes:
"Matthias Becker" <Matthias_member pathlink.com> wrote in message
news:btrvl0$h33$1 digitaldaemon.com...
I think it's pretty close. I'm finishing up what I hope will be the last


of new features, and then it'll be bug fixing. D 1.0 will probably be the
most powerful 1.0 language ever released!

There is no C++-Standard before C++98. So this is version 1.0 and it's

 more powerfull that D.

D has many very powerful features that C++ does not have, such as nested functions and inline assembly. C++ has features that D does not have, such as a preprocessor and virtual base classes. While no definitive answer is possible since eventually one starts comparing apples to oranges, what in your view makes C++ more powerful than D?
Jan 11 2004
next sibling parent reply Andy Friesen <andy ikagames.com> writes:
Walter wrote:
 "Matthias Becker" <Matthias_member pathlink.com> wrote in message
 news:btrvl0$h33$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 
I think it's pretty close. I'm finishing up what I hope will be the last


bit
of new features, and then it'll be bug fixing. D 1.0 will probably be the
most powerful 1.0 language ever released!

There is no C++-Standard before C++98. So this is version 1.0 and it's

still
more powerfull that D.

D has many very powerful features that C++ does not have, such as nested functions and inline assembly. C++ has features that D does not have, such as a preprocessor and virtual base classes. While no definitive answer is possible since eventually one starts comparing apples to oranges, what in your view makes C++ more powerful than D?

The fact that C++ template functions can infer their template arguments makes it really easy to express certain things, however much grief it causes the compiler. Also, C++ interfaces with C++ quite well. :) I don't think the preprocessor counts: there's nothing at all stopping someone from running cpp through some D source before giving it to the D compiler. The only difference is that not using a preprocessor with C++ is complete suicide. (which isn't exactly a strong point) I think that's about it. C++'s real strength is that it's so prolific. There are tons of tools and libraries written with and for C++, as well as people used to thinking in terms of it. -- andy
Jan 11 2004
parent reply "Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> writes:
"Andy Friesen" <andy ikagames.com> wrote in message
news:btscdc$15go$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 Walter wrote:
There is no C++-Standard before C++98. So this is version 1.0 and it's

more powerfull that D.

D has many very powerful features that C++ does not have, such as nested functions and inline assembly. C++ has features that D does not have,


 as a preprocessor and virtual base classes. While no definitive answer


 possible since eventually one starts comparing apples to oranges, what


 your view makes C++ more powerful than D?

The fact that C++ template functions can infer their template arguments makes it really easy to express certain things, however much grief it causes the compiler.

Given the vast array of features in both languages, is that really an overriding feature?
 Also, C++ interfaces with C++ quite well. :)

That's cheating <g>.
 I don't think the preprocessor counts: there's nothing at all stopping
 someone from running cpp through some D source before giving it to the D
 compiler.

True (and D is specifically accommodating to doing that), but technically speaking, using addon tools is not part of the language itself.
 C++'s real strength is that it's so prolific.  There are tons of tools
 and libraries written with and for C++, as well as people used to
 thinking in terms of it.

Undeniably, C++ is rich in books, libraries, user base, articles written about it, etc.
Jan 11 2004
next sibling parent reply Andy Friesen <andy ikagames.com> writes:
Walter wrote:
 "Andy Friesen" <andy ikagames.com> wrote in message
 news:btscdc$15go$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 
The fact that C++ template functions can infer their template arguments
makes it really easy to express certain things, however much grief it
causes the compiler.

Given the vast array of features in both languages, is that really an overriding feature?

I'm not sure. I myself can live without it, but you have to look at the sorts of things boost manages to pull off. Not the least of which is using exactly this to implement some amazingly convincing (though somewhat brittle) lambda forms. (basically, it involves a template object that appends operations to itself when you apply an operator to it)
Also, C++ interfaces with C++ quite well. :)

That's cheating <g>.

That's the trouble with getting in a fight with The Man. He never fights fair. ;) -- andy
Jan 11 2004
parent reply "Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> writes:
"Andy Friesen" <andy ikagames.com> wrote in message
news:btstea$210m$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 Walter wrote:
 "Andy Friesen" <andy ikagames.com> wrote in message
 news:btscdc$15go$1 digitaldaemon.com...
The fact that C++ template functions can infer their template arguments
makes it really easy to express certain things, however much grief it
causes the compiler.

overriding feature?

sorts of things boost manages to pull off. Not the least of which is using exactly this to implement some amazingly convincing (though somewhat brittle) lambda forms. (basically, it involves a template object that appends operations to itself when you apply an operator to it)

Sure, but D offers direct support for lambda forms! I've seen some of the C++ lambda libraries, and while they are technically amazing, they are a little past the bleeding edge for production use because, as you say, they are brittle. Perhaps we disagree on what power means. I interpret it as being able to get what I want done in a simple, straightforward manner. If something can only be done as a complex, brittle construction loaded with special rules, I'm going to suggest that reveals a weakness in the language. For a simpler example, let's take inline functions. I can do it like this: inline int max(int a, int b) { return a < b ? b : a; } or I can say, use the powerful preprocessor: #define max(a,b) ((a) < (b) ? (b) : (a)) The latter is brittle and loaded with special rules and traps for the unwary. Therefore I think the former is more powerful.
Jan 11 2004
next sibling parent reply Andy Friesen <andy ikagames.com> writes:
Walter wrote:
 Sure, but D offers direct support for lambda forms! I've seen some of the
 C++ lambda libraries, and while they are technically amazing, they are a
 little past the bleeding edge for production use because, as you say, they
 are brittle.
 
 Perhaps we disagree on what power means. I interpret it as being able to get
 what I want done in a simple, straightforward manner. If something can only
 be done as a complex, brittle construction loaded with special rules, I'm
 going to suggest that reveals a weakness in the language.

Absolutely. I just have this thing for playing the devil's advocate sometimes. :) What I meant was that lambdas weren't even supposed to be part of the language, but the existing constructs (almost, heh) allow it to happen anyway. C++ is impressive in that it's possible to extend the language from within itself in this way, and to make those extensions (sometimes) appear completely transparent, or nearly so. To be honest, I'm not at all convinced it's worth the tradeoff, but there are those who disagree with me. -- andy
Jan 11 2004
next sibling parent "Matthew" <matthew.hat stlsoft.dot.org> writes:
"Andy Friesen" <andy ikagames.com> wrote in message
news:btte7f$2t4t$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 Walter wrote:
 Sure, but D offers direct support for lambda forms! I've seen some of


 C++ lambda libraries, and while they are technically amazing, they are a
 little past the bleeding edge for production use because, as you say,


 are brittle.

 Perhaps we disagree on what power means. I interpret it as being able to


 what I want done in a simple, straightforward manner. If something can


 be done as a complex, brittle construction loaded with special rules,


 going to suggest that reveals a weakness in the language.

Absolutely. I just have this thing for playing the devil's advocate sometimes. :) What I meant was that lambdas weren't even supposed to be part of the language, but the existing constructs (almost, heh) allow it to happen anyway. C++ is impressive in that it's possible to extend the language from within itself in this way, and to make those extensions (sometimes) appear completely transparent, or nearly so. To be honest, I'm not at all convinced it's worth the tradeoff, but there are those who disagree with me.

Surely it depends on a case-by-case basis. If it's efficient, and it's widely supported, and it does not require an inscrutable mass of template and/or macro arcana, then I would say it is worth it. If it fails on any of those criteria, I would say it's not worth it.
Jan 11 2004
prev sibling next sibling parent reply "Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> writes:
"Andy Friesen" <andy ikagames.com> wrote in message
news:btte7f$2t4t$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 To be honest, I'm not at all convinced it's worth the tradeoff, but
 there are those who disagree with me.

Right. I've been taken to task by some C++ experts for designing a whole new language rather than working to add more generic programming power into C++.
Jan 11 2004
parent reply "C" <dont respond.com> writes:
I think C++ has enough add-on s as it is, it starts to feel like a bunch of
hacks.  Now they're just stuffing it full of everything they can find.

IMO starting a new language was the perfect strategy.  D is so clean , to me
being able to express myself clearly and consistently without jumping
through hurdles qualifies D as the most powerful ( currently ).

I think when honest C++ users start with D ( there is always those who
cannot let go ), their thoughts well be along the line of :
"Its about damn time."

C

"Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> wrote in message
news:btti8m$22d$2 digitaldaemon.com...
 "Andy Friesen" <andy ikagames.com> wrote in message
 news:btte7f$2t4t$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 To be honest, I'm not at all convinced it's worth the tradeoff, but
 there are those who disagree with me.

Right. I've been taken to task by some C++ experts for designing a whole

 language rather than working to add more generic programming power into


Jan 12 2004
parent "Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> writes:
"C" <dont respond.com> wrote in message
news:btuium$1qgd$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 I think C++ has enough add-on s as it is, it starts to feel like a bunch

 hacks.

Because of the legacy compatibility problem C++ has, any new additions are pretty much forced into looking like hacks, or are pretty much unimplementable, like export. (Yes, I know EDG proved it could be implemented at enormous expense.)
 Now they're just stuffing it full of everything they can find.

I'm going to defend C++ on that point. Aside from export, I think the features added in to C++ were carefully considered and are defensible. The problems stem from having to fit those features into the legacy framework, and are unavoidable given an unwillingness to break existing code.
 IMO starting a new language was the perfect strategy.  D is so clean , to

 being able to express myself clearly and consistently without jumping
 through hurdles qualifies D as the most powerful ( currently ).

My sentiments exactly!
 I think when honest C++ users start with D ( there is always those who
 cannot let go ), their thoughts well be along the line of :
 "Its about damn time."

That is the reaction I get from most people who are willing to give it an unbiased look. A few who do give it an honest look don't like it, and that's ok, too. Not everyone has the same idea of what a reengineered C++ should look like.
Jan 12 2004
prev sibling parent reply Ant <Ant_member pathlink.com> writes:
In article <btte7f$2t4t$1 digitaldaemon.com>, Andy Friesen says...

informative but there another thing that must be said: Superman can beat Batman anytime! Ant (sorry - coulnd't resist)
Jan 12 2004
parent "Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> writes:
"Ant" <Ant_member pathlink.com> wrote in message
news:btud3g$1gts$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 Superman can beat Batman anytime!

LOL, Nothing like putting things in perspective!
Jan 12 2004
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Georg Wrede <Georg_member pathlink.com> writes:
In article <btt3h3$2aqu$1 digitaldaemon.com>, Walter says...
"Andy Friesen" <andy ikagames.com> wrote in message
news:btstea$210m$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 Walter wrote:
 "Andy Friesen" <andy ikagames.com> wrote in message



I think that discussing the power of a language (or, especially the relative power of languages), has the same inherent problems as discussing Quality. The economist academia have for years tried to come up with an unambiguous, quantifiable, definition for quality, unsuccessfully. Since the comparison between any two languages ultimately reduces to comparing apples to oranges, we should at least temporarily define what power means. While doing that, we should also remember that "in reality" power is a street concept that is measured mostly unconsciously. I assume this includes, in addition to factual language differences, things like usability and applicability for the end user, which includes the easily accessible libraries, number and quality of tools, whether you can ask the guy in the next cubicle for help, etc., etc. The Street Power is what decides, with the masses, at least, which language will be used. Here, I think, what counts, are those properties "we can do something about" in the next 3 months? (For C++ in this discussion Power should exclude supporting programs, such as IDE, lint, and others.)
(...) what power means. I interpret it as being able to get
what I want done in a simple, straightforward manner. If something can only
be done as a complex, brittle construction loaded with special rules, I'm
going to suggest that reveals a weakness in the language.

Agreed.
Jan 11 2004
parent reply "Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> writes:
"Georg Wrede" <Georg_member pathlink.com> wrote in message
news:bttfqv$2vic$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 I think that discussing the power of a language (or, especially
 the relative power of languages), has the same inherent problems
 as discussing Quality. The economist academia have for years tried
 to come up with an unambiguous, quantifiable, definition for quality,
 unsuccessfully.

Yes.
 Since the comparison between any two languages ultimately reduces
 to comparing apples to oranges, we should at least temporarily
 define what power means.

In an academic sense, yes. But that's not really what I was after. I wanted to know what other peoples' perception of power was, and what they were using as criteria to support the conclusion that C++ was more powerful than D. In other words, I want to understand what I missed either in D or if I just failed in explaining what D can to.
 While doing that, we should also remember that "in reality" power
 is a street concept that is measured mostly unconsciously.

Yes.
 I assume
 this includes, in addition to factual language differences, things
 like usability and applicability for the end user, which includes
 the easily accessible libraries, number and quality of tools,
 whether you can ask the guy in the next cubicle for help, etc., etc.

All new languages have a major uphill battle with that. And I believe 2004 is the year in which we'll get solidly into the game on that.
Jan 11 2004
next sibling parent reply Matthias Becker <Matthias_member pathlink.com> writes:
 I assume
 this includes, in addition to factual language differences, things
 like usability and applicability for the end user, which includes
 the easily accessible libraries, number and quality of tools,
 whether you can ask the guy in the next cubicle for help, etc., etc.

All new languages have a major uphill battle with that. And I believe 2004 is the year in which we'll get solidly into the game on that.

compaired to .NET? This is the libray that comes with a new language (C#) today. Javas library isn't bad as well. I think it will be hard.
Jan 12 2004
next sibling parent "Sean L. Palmer" <palmer.sean verizon.net> writes:
.NET is designed so that other languages can be ported to it as a platform.
D can use the .NET libraries once a CIL compiler is made for it.

Sean

"Matthias Becker" <Matthias_member pathlink.com> wrote in message
news:btul5l$1u8d$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 I assume
 this includes, in addition to factual language differences, things
 like usability and applicability for the end user, which includes
 the easily accessible libraries, number and quality of tools,
 whether you can ask the guy in the next cubicle for help, etc., etc.

All new languages have a major uphill battle with that. And I believe


is the year in which we'll get solidly into the game on that.

compaired to .NET? This is the libray that comes with a new language (C#)

 Javas library isn't bad as well. I think it will be hard.

Jan 12 2004
prev sibling parent reply "Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> writes:
"Matthias Becker" <Matthias_member pathlink.com> wrote in message
news:btul5l$1u8d$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 I assume
 this includes, in addition to factual language differences, things
 like usability and applicability for the end user, which includes
 the easily accessible libraries, number and quality of tools,
 whether you can ask the guy in the next cubicle for help, etc., etc.

All new languages have a major uphill battle with that. And I believe


is the year in which we'll get solidly into the game on that.

compaired to .NET? This is the libray that comes with a new language (C#)

 Javas library isn't bad as well. I think it will be hard.

There's just no way D will get a library comparable in breadth to .net and java in 2004. But I don't see that as necessary to the near term success of D. However, I expect to see the emergence of tools to aid in getting existing C and C++ libraries to work with D. And that will help a lot.
Jan 12 2004
next sibling parent reply Ian Johnston <Ian_member pathlink.com> writes:
In article <btuv9l$2g2j$3 digitaldaemon.com>, Walter says...
"Matthias Becker" <Matthias_member pathlink.com> wrote in message
news:btul5l$1u8d$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 I assume
 this includes, in addition to factual language differences, things
 like usability and applicability for the end user, which includes
 the easily accessible libraries, number and quality of tools,
 whether you can ask the guy in the next cubicle for help, etc., etc.

All new languages have a major uphill battle with that. And I believe


is the year in which we'll get solidly into the game on that.

compaired to .NET? This is the libray that comes with a new language (C#)

 Javas library isn't bad as well. I think it will be hard.

There's just no way D will get a library comparable in breadth to .net and java in 2004. But I don't see that as necessary to the near term success of D. However, I expect to see the emergence of tools to aid in getting existing C and C++ libraries to work with D. And that will help a lot.

Adding a D generator to the SWIG package would surely go a long way to alleviating many of these problems. Ian
Jan 13 2004
parent Ilya Minkov <minkov cs.tum.edu> writes:
Ian Johnston wrote:
 Adding a D generator to the SWIG package would surely go a long way to
 alleviating many of these problems.

There already is one. Andy wrote it. Here, scroll down. http://ikagames.com/andy/d/ -eye
Jan 13 2004
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Matthias Becker <Matthias_member pathlink.com> writes:
There's just no way D will get a library comparable in breadth to .net and
java in 2004. But I don't see that as necessary to the near term success of
D. However, I expect to see the emergence of tools to aid in getting
existing C and C++ libraries to work with D. And that will help a lot.

Jan 13 2004
parent "Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> writes:
"Matthias Becker" <Matthias_member pathlink.com> wrote in message
news:bu19s0$88l$1 digitaldaemon.com...
There's just no way D will get a library comparable in breadth to .net


java in 2004. But I don't see that as necessary to the near term success


D. However, I expect to see the emergence of tools to aid in getting
existing C and C++ libraries to work with D. And that will help a lot.


What libraries would you like to see in D?
Jan 13 2004
prev sibling parent reply "Achilleas Margaritis" <axilmar b-online.gr> writes:
 There's just no way D will get a library comparable in breadth to .net and
 java in 2004. But I don't see that as necessary to the near term success

 D. However, I expect to see the emergence of tools to aid in getting
 existing C and C++ libraries to work with D. And that will help a lot.

Sorry for getting involved Walter, but I think you got it wrong here. I may not know very much about compilers, but having dealt with many different programmers in my career, the first thing they ask about a new language is: "can I do X with this new language Y?" For example, today I demonstrated to my colleagues a little demo I have made about colliding snooker balls, showing collision and reaction. The very first question was: "In what language did you do it ?" I replied: "C++." "Oh, I thought it was made with Macromedia." The guy that asked came from a web design team. The immediate question was: "I see that C++ can do graphics, eh ? nice" I did not tell him anything. I could not explain to him that there are so many options in C++ for doing graphics, and there is no standard!!! My job is with defense/real-time applications (my company has a small department about that). Up until now, we used ADA and C++. Now, our contractor wants us to use Java!!! And we have, for about 2 years now. Why do the military want to use Java anyway ? I will tell you why: because of the libraries. They told us that "the cost of porting an app or writing it in a language that does not directly support things like gui, threads or networking is much more than writing it in Java, even with the Java tradeoffs." The moral of this story is that computing power is cheap, but computing labour is expensive. So, every little help matters, and having a first class library support for GUI and other important stuff is one of the primary concerns. C++ is slowly being abandoned for this reason. So, I don't think D, even if it is the richest, most elegant and easier programming language in the world, will succeed without standard libraries for what the modern developer wants. .NET and Java have it, why not D ? Finally, I was reading an interview with Stroustrup, where he said that C++ did not have a standard GUI library, because of two reasons: 1) at the time that it was developed, GUIs where not the primary user interface, at least in the not specialized section of the market. 2) there were no people willing to write a standard GUI, especially in the light of non-existing GUIs back then. The above can be translated (by reading between the lines) as "I wish there was a standard GUI for C++, but, as the situation is right now, it will never be". (I am mentioning GUI first because it is *the* most important thing; but there are also other functionalities to consider).
Jan 13 2004
next sibling parent reply "C" <dont respond.com> writes:
This is the best argument for Java I've heard yet , cost.  And unfortunately
in the end , alot of times thats what it comes down to ( especially with the
government ;) )

C
"Achilleas Margaritis" <axilmar b-online.gr> wrote in message
news:bu24j2$1m5l$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 There's just no way D will get a library comparable in breadth to .net


 java in 2004. But I don't see that as necessary to the near term success

 D. However, I expect to see the emergence of tools to aid in getting
 existing C and C++ libraries to work with D. And that will help a lot.

Sorry for getting involved Walter, but I think you got it wrong here. I

 not know very much about compilers, but having dealt with many different
 programmers in my career, the first thing they ask about a new language

 "can I do X with this new language Y?"

 For example, today I demonstrated to my colleagues a little demo I have

 about colliding snooker balls, showing collision and reaction. The very
 first question was:

 "In what language did you do it ?"

 I replied:

 "C++."

 "Oh, I thought it was made with Macromedia."

 The guy that asked came from a web design team.

 The immediate question was:

 "I see that C++ can do graphics, eh ? nice"

 I did not tell him anything. I could not explain to him that there are so
 many options in C++ for doing graphics, and there is no standard!!!

 My job is with defense/real-time applications (my company has a small
 department about that). Up until now, we used ADA and C++. Now, our
 contractor wants us to use Java!!! And we have, for about 2 years now.

 Why do the military want to use Java anyway ? I will tell you why: because
 of the libraries. They told us that "the cost of porting an app or writing
 it in a language that does not directly support things like gui, threads

 networking is much more than writing it in Java, even with the Java
 tradeoffs."

 The moral of this story is that computing power is cheap, but computing
 labour is expensive. So, every little help matters, and having a first

 library support for GUI and other important stuff is one of the primary
 concerns.

 C++ is slowly being abandoned for this reason.

 So, I don't think D, even if it is the richest, most elegant and easier
 programming language in the world, will succeed without standard libraries
 for what the modern developer wants.

 .NET and Java have it, why not D ?

 Finally, I was reading an interview with Stroustrup, where he said that

 did not have a standard GUI library, because of two reasons:

 1) at the time that it was developed, GUIs where not the primary user
 interface, at least in the not specialized section of the market.

 2) there were no people willing to write a standard GUI, especially in the
 light of non-existing GUIs back then.

 The above can be translated (by reading between the lines) as "I wish

 was a standard GUI for C++, but, as the situation is right now, it will
 never be".

 (I am mentioning GUI first because it is *the* most important thing; but
 there are also other functionalities to consider).

Jan 13 2004
parent "Andrew Edwards" <edwardsac spamfreeusa.com> writes:
"C" <dont respond.com> wrote in message
news:bu2d7k$24lt$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 This is the best argument for Java I've heard yet , cost.  And

 in the end , alot of times thats what it comes down to ( especially with

 government ;) )

 C

With the government thats the only thing it ever comes down to.
Jan 15 2004
prev sibling next sibling parent reply "Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> writes:
"Achilleas Margaritis" <axilmar b-online.gr> wrote in message
news:bu24j2$1m5l$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 The moral of this story is that computing power is cheap, but computing
 labour is expensive. So, every little help matters, and having a first

 library support for GUI and other important stuff is one of the primary
 concerns.

I think you make a good point.
 C++ is slowly being abandoned for this reason.

I think C++'s biggest problem is the expense of training people to use it properly.
 So, I don't think D, even if it is the richest, most elegant and easier
 programming language in the world, will succeed without standard libraries
 for what the modern developer wants.

I agree that libraries are very important. But the first step is having a powerful language!
 .NET and Java have it, why not D ?

Why not indeed!
 (I am mentioning GUI first because it is *the* most important thing; but
 there are also other functionalities to consider).

What I'd like to have happen, rather than design a new GUI from scratch, instead take the best one out there and port it to D.
Jan 13 2004
parent reply Paul Runde <prunde consolidated.net> writes:
Walter wrote:
 
 What I'd like to have happen, rather than design a new GUI from scratch,
 instead take the best one out there and port it to D.
 
 

Jan 14 2004
next sibling parent reply "Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> writes:
"Paul Runde" <prunde consolidated.net> wrote in message
news:bu4lvc$2qo1$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 Walter wrote:
 What I'd like to have happen, rather than design a new GUI from scratch,
 instead take the best one out there and port it to D.


wxWindows is certainly a contender.
Jan 14 2004
parent Parinya Thipchart <thipchart yahoo.com> writes:
Walter wrote:
 "Paul Runde" <prunde consolidated.net> wrote in message
 news:bu4lvc$2qo1$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 
Walter wrote:

What I'd like to have happen, rather than design a new GUI from scratch,
instead take the best one out there and port it to D.

Any suggestions as for which GUI library is the best one? wxWindows?

wxWindows is certainly a contender.

wxWindows is the best choice in my opinion. 1. API is well designed easy to remember. 2. It supports a lot of GUI widgets and a lot of utility functions. 3. Cross-platforms. It has supported many platforms. 4. Its license that allows to make a commercial applications. 5. Borland has supported some works. 6. It's possible to build wxWindows with your great DMC so why not D :P ... I really would like to see wxWindows as a part of D GUI toolkit. Just my 2cents. Regards, Parinya P.S. Sorry for my bad English.
Jan 15 2004
prev sibling parent Stewart Gordon <smjg_1998 yahoo.com> writes:
While it was 15/1/04 12:14 am throughout the UK, Paul Runde sprinkled 
little black dots on a white screen, and they fell thus:
 Walter wrote:
 
 
 What I'd like to have happen, rather than design a new GUI from scratch,
 instead take the best one out there and port it to D.


Depends on what you want out of a library. There are those that try to completely mask the OS API. These have the advantage that they can be made cross-platform, but tend to sacrifice such native programming concepts as resource files for dialogs, menus and the like. And then there are those that are geared to the API of a specific OS. A prime example is Borland's ObjectWindows Library - presumably Microsoft Foundation Classes is the same sort of thing. This has the programmer working with Windows API entities, and many of the OWL classes are simply wrappers around these entities. In effect, a programmer-friendly interface to the API is provided that retains access to near-enough the whole API. But either kind of library would tend to work in the same basic way - having a class for each GUI object (window, dialog, control, whatever else) and having the programmer define a method for each event (or dialog control) to be caught. I am working on a GUI library in the style of OWL. At the moment it's only really capable of producing a program that does nothing, but that's soon going to change. Stewart. -- My e-mail is valid but not my primary mailbox, aside from its being the unfortunate victim of intensive mail-bombing at the moment. Please keep replies on the 'group where everyone may benefit.
Jan 15 2004
prev sibling parent reply Georg Wrede <Georg_member pathlink.com> writes:
In article <bu24j2$1m5l$1 digitaldaemon.com>, Achilleas Margaritis says...
..
The moral of this story is that computing power is cheap, but computing
labour is expensive. So, every little help matters, and having a first class
library support for GUI and other important stuff is one of the primary
concerns.

Finally, I was reading an interview with Stroustrup, where he said that C++
did not have a standard GUI library, because of two reasons:

The above can be translated (by reading between the lines) as "I wish there
was a standard GUI for C++, but, as the situation is right now, it will
never be".

While I personally couldn't care less about the GUI, it does have an enormous impact on the street. (You have to remember that for every programmer there are 10 jerks pretending to be the Resident Know-it-all, and these people want to make a big splash with very little programming. (Deplorable, I know.) But each of these has an Uncle-in-law who is a corporate big shot. Ahd those are the guys making the Real Decisions.) Being able to write easy programs that loog good, just is a prerequisite to making any serious inroads to the crystallised VB community. Borland made a splash with Turbo Vision (a character based GUI for console programming, both Pascal and C++). This gave extra years and industry usage to Pascal, beyond their own expectations. Later they made The GUI for Pascal, (and mostly for marketing reasons) changed the name to Delphi, as if there were a new language to go with the GUI. This has had an enormous success. I dare say, if it hadn't been for Java, (and the $M put to its marketing) then Delphi would rule head to head with VB today. So, access to effortless GUI programming does make a difference for a language. One does not have to have a GUI (let alone an operating system specific one) _in_ the language, or even in the Standard Library. But what we have to make sure is _easy access_ and _common knowledge where to get it_!! The main thing is that people actually do start using one. The less hours people use fighting with GUI trivialities, or operating system idiosyncracies, the more time they can use to produce splashy, or useful, or even controversial applications in D. It's like the old economist puzzle: give $100 000 each to 5 guys to invest for 5 years. The first year one of them does 25% better than the others. Now, how much do the others have to improve if he goes on with that same absolute return rate? Answer: no matter how much they cheat, how many they murder, they'll never catch up, in the real world. So, we better get those 25% more users _this year_. If it's not the GUI programming, it'll have to be something else real sexy.
Jan 14 2004
parent reply "C" <dont respond.com> writes:
Well said!

I know its not sexy yet ( soon! ) , but there is Windy (
www.atari-soldiers.com/windy.html ).  An effortless GUI is helped alot by
the language i think , and D definetly has that going for it.

C

"Georg Wrede" <Georg_member pathlink.com> wrote in message
news:bu4lgt$2q17$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 In article <bu24j2$1m5l$1 digitaldaemon.com>, Achilleas Margaritis says...
 ..
The moral of this story is that computing power is cheap, but computing
labour is expensive. So, every little help matters, and having a first


library support for GUI and other important stuff is one of the primary
concerns.

Finally, I was reading an interview with Stroustrup, where he said that


did not have a standard GUI library, because of two reasons:

The above can be translated (by reading between the lines) as "I wish


was a standard GUI for C++, but, as the situation is right now, it will
never be".

While I personally couldn't care less about the GUI, it does have an

 impact on the street. (You have to remember that for every programmer

 are 10 jerks pretending to be the Resident Know-it-all, and these people
 want to make a big splash with very little programming. (Deplorable, I
 know.) But each of these has an Uncle-in-law who is a corporate big shot.
 Ahd those are the guys making the Real Decisions.) Being able to write
 easy programs that loog good, just is a prerequisite to making any serious
 inroads to the crystallised VB community.

 Borland made a splash with Turbo Vision (a character based GUI for console
 programming, both Pascal and C++). This gave extra years and industry
 usage to Pascal, beyond their own expectations. Later they made The GUI
 for Pascal, (and mostly for marketing reasons) changed the name to
 Delphi, as if there were a new language to go with the GUI. This has had
 an enormous success. I dare say, if it hadn't been for Java, (and the
 $M put to its marketing) then Delphi would rule head to head with VB

 So, access to effortless GUI programming does make a difference for a
 language.

 One does not have to have a GUI (let alone an operating system specific
 one) _in_ the language, or even in the Standard Library. But what we have
 to make sure is _easy access_ and _common knowledge where to get it_!!

 The main thing is that people actually do start using one. The less
 hours people use fighting with GUI trivialities, or operating system
 idiosyncracies, the more time they can use to produce splashy, or
 useful, or even controversial applications in D.

 It's like the old economist puzzle: give $100 000 each to 5 guys to
 invest for 5 years. The first year one of them does 25% better than
 the others. Now, how much do the others have to improve if he goes
 on with that same absolute return rate?

 Answer: no matter how much they cheat, how many they murder, they'll
 never catch up, in the real world.

 So, we better get those 25% more users _this year_. If it's not the
 GUI programming, it'll have to be something else real sexy.

Jan 14 2004
parent reply Andy Friesen <andy ikagames.com> writes:
C wrote:

 Well said!
 
 I know its not sexy yet ( soon! ) , but there is Windy (
 www.atari-soldiers.com/windy.html ).  An effortless GUI is helped alot by
 the language i think , and D definetly has that going for it.
 
 C

A tiny word of advice on that. The main reason I haven't done much fiddling with windy at the moment is because it's large enough that understanding the design is nontrivial. Profuse documentation (both the interface, and the implementation) would probably go a long way towards encouraging folks to try and use/improve it. Additionally, you may want to get a hold of the author of DUI. If windy and DUI just so happened to have identical interfaces, then D would suddenly have something quite similar to IBM's SWT. (SWT is the GUI toolkit used in Eclipse. It's basically reimplemented for every platform for maximum speed and native-look-and-feel-ism) -- andy
Jan 14 2004
parent Ant <duitoolkit yahoo.ca> writes:
On Wed, 14 Jan 2004 21:30:43 -0800, Andy Friesen wrote:

 
 Additionally, you may want to get a hold of the author of DUI.  If windy 
 and DUI just so happened to have identical interfaces, then D would 
 suddenly have something quite similar to IBM's SWT.  (SWT is the GUI 
 toolkit used in Eclipse.  It's basically reimplemented for every 
 platform for maximum speed and native-look-and-feel-ism)
 

DUI is just a thin layer over GTK. it's GTK calls wrapped 1 to 1 on D objects using D arrays instead of GTK GList and defining an OO interface to callbacks (the listeners you guys don't like). Nothing more than that (oh, and a few of simplifications on the API) I started DUI because I tought I could get it with a reasonable low amount of efford. We could start by trying something like AWT: create a common interface for what exist on both platforms. but I'm not put any hours on that. DUI is already available for windows - even if alpha with some important widgets missing (ie ComboBox) Ant DUI - D graphical Use Interface http://dui.sourceforge.net
Jan 14 2004
prev sibling parent "C" <dont respond.com> writes:
 All new languages have a major uphill battle with that.  > And I believe

Hear hear! The year of the D(ragon)! C is the year in which we'll get solidly into the game on that. "Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> wrote in message news:bttiri$30t$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 "Georg Wrede" <Georg_member pathlink.com> wrote in message
 news:bttfqv$2vic$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 I think that discussing the power of a language (or, especially
 the relative power of languages), has the same inherent problems
 as discussing Quality. The economist academia have for years tried
 to come up with an unambiguous, quantifiable, definition for quality,
 unsuccessfully.

Yes.
 Since the comparison between any two languages ultimately reduces
 to comparing apples to oranges, we should at least temporarily
 define what power means.

In an academic sense, yes. But that's not really what I was after. I

 to know what other peoples' perception of power was, and what they were
 using as criteria to support the conclusion that C++ was more powerful

 D. In other words, I want to understand what I missed either in D or if I
 just failed in explaining what D can to.

 While doing that, we should also remember that "in reality" power
 is a street concept that is measured mostly unconsciously.

Yes.
 I assume
 this includes, in addition to factual language differences, things
 like usability and applicability for the end user, which includes
 the easily accessible libraries, number and quality of tools,
 whether you can ask the guy in the next cubicle for help, etc., etc.

All new languages have a major uphill battle with that. And I believe 2004 is the year in which we'll get solidly into the game on that.

Jan 12 2004
prev sibling parent Matthias Becker <Matthias_member pathlink.com> writes:
Perhaps we disagree on what power means. I interpret it as being able to get
what I want done in a simple, straightforward manner. If something can only
be done as a complex, brittle construction loaded with special rules, I'm
going to suggest that reveals a weakness in the language.

For a simpler example, let's take inline functions. I can do it like this:

    inline int max(int a, int b) { return a < b ? b : a; }

or I can say, use the powerful preprocessor:

    #define max(a,b) ((a) < (b) ? (b) : (a))

The latter is brittle and loaded with special rules and traps for the
unwary. Therefore I think the former is more powerful.

inline doesn't force the compiler for doing inline expanding. Anyway inline has another effect here. If you definie the function inline in a header you don't violate the ODR.
Jan 12 2004
prev sibling parent reply "Ben Hinkle" <bhinkle4 juno.com> writes:
 Also, C++ interfaces with C++ quite well. :)

That's cheating <g>.

Actually, gcj, the GNU java compiler, has a cool ability to interface directly with C++ (at least C++ compiled with g++) through their own CNI mechanism - a Java class is compiled down to the same ABI as a C++ class. You can write typical C++ or Java and it looks pretty much the same. With D I don't know how well this would work but I think it would "help the cause" tremendously. That was one feature I wanted to shoot for while I'm playing around with gnu D. -Ben
Jan 12 2004
parent "Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> writes:
"Ben Hinkle" <bhinkle4 juno.com> wrote in message
news:btu8i7$198d$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 Also, C++ interfaces with C++ quite well. :)

That's cheating <g>.

Actually, gcj, the GNU java compiler, has a cool ability to interface directly with C++ (at least C++ compiled with g++) through their own CNI mechanism - a Java class is compiled down to the same ABI as a C++ class. You can write typical C++ or Java and it looks pretty much the same. With

 I don't know how well this would work but I think it would "help the

 tremendously. That was one feature I wanted to shoot for while I'm playing
 around with gnu D.

D objects don't have the same layout as C++ objects. One could, though, fiddle with C++ objects to make them map onto D objects, but it won't work the other way. There is the same problem with Java objects, perhaps that's what CNI does.
Jan 12 2004
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Mark Arts <Mark_member pathlink.com> writes:
D has many very powerful features that C++ does not have, such as nested
functions and inline assembly. C++ has features that D does not have, such
as a preprocessor and virtual base classes. While no definitive answer is
possible since eventually one starts comparing apples to oranges, what in
your view makes C++ more powerful than D?

C++ supports C headers natively :-) D doesn't, and this is especially annoying while writing programs using the Windows API. Indeed, there is a hint of some Win32-API headers in the phobos library, but they are not nearly enough to make a useful program. Also, a lot of functions that are supported by D have an A attached to them. Of course, this has to do with the unicode definitions of C++, but it is not very handy to have to look up the D definitions every time you want to use a function. Or, for that matter, to have to export a lot of functions myself to support even the most basic things as posting messages, and adressing dialog items. So if you define powerful as being able to easily make user-friendly Win32 apps, then C++ is way more powerful. As for my wishlist, you can guess: I would like the full Win32-API headers when you download D, and aliased without the A's. This would also cause people not to choose immediately for C++ programming an application because D can't, or only after a lot of typing.
Jan 12 2004
next sibling parent imr1984 <imr1984_member pathlink.com> writes:
id just like to say that headers are a pain in the arse, and the fact that D
doesnt use them is the primary reason i started to learn D. Declaring a function
declaration as well as a definition is such a waste of time. And dont get me
started on extern variables...

In article <bttpa0$fp7$1 digitaldaemon.com>, Mark Arts says...
D has many very powerful features that C++ does not have, such as nested
functions and inline assembly. C++ has features that D does not have, such
as a preprocessor and virtual base classes. While no definitive answer is
possible since eventually one starts comparing apples to oranges, what in
your view makes C++ more powerful than D?

C++ supports C headers natively :-) D doesn't, and this is especially annoying while writing programs using the Windows API. Indeed, there is a hint of some Win32-API headers in the phobos library, but they are not nearly enough to make a useful program. Also, a lot of functions that are supported by D have an A attached to them. Of course, this has to do with the unicode definitions of C++, but it is not very handy to have to look up the D definitions every time you want to use a function. Or, for that matter, to have to export a lot of functions myself to support even the most basic things as posting messages, and adressing dialog items. So if you define powerful as being able to easily make user-friendly Win32 apps, then C++ is way more powerful. As for my wishlist, you can guess: I would like the full Win32-API headers when you download D, and aliased without the A's. This would also cause people not to choose immediately for C++ programming an application because D can't, or only after a lot of typing.

Jan 12 2004
prev sibling next sibling parent imr1984 <imr1984_member pathlink.com> writes:
id just like to say that headers are a pain in the arse, and the fact that D
doesnt use them is the primary reason i started to learn D. Declaring a function
declaration as well as a definition is such a waste of time. And dont get me
started on extern variables...

In article <bttpa0$fp7$1 digitaldaemon.com>, Mark Arts says...
D has many very powerful features that C++ does not have, such as nested
functions and inline assembly. C++ has features that D does not have, such
as a preprocessor and virtual base classes. While no definitive answer is
possible since eventually one starts comparing apples to oranges, what in
your view makes C++ more powerful than D?

C++ supports C headers natively :-) D doesn't, and this is especially annoying while writing programs using the Windows API. Indeed, there is a hint of some Win32-API headers in the phobos library, but they are not nearly enough to make a useful program. Also, a lot of functions that are supported by D have an A attached to them. Of course, this has to do with the unicode definitions of C++, but it is not very handy to have to look up the D definitions every time you want to use a function. Or, for that matter, to have to export a lot of functions myself to support even the most basic things as posting messages, and adressing dialog items. So if you define powerful as being able to easily make user-friendly Win32 apps, then C++ is way more powerful. As for my wishlist, you can guess: I would like the full Win32-API headers when you download D, and aliased without the A's. This would also cause people not to choose immediately for C++ programming an application because D can't, or only after a lot of typing.

Jan 12 2004
prev sibling next sibling parent reply "Lars Ivar Igesund" <larsivar igesund.net> writes:
This ha nothing to do with the language itself, but with documentation and
library support.

Lars Ivar Igesund

"Mark Arts" <Mark_member pathlink.com> wrote in message
news:bttpa0$fp7$1 digitaldaemon.com...
D has many very powerful features that C++ does not have, such as nested
functions and inline assembly. C++ has features that D does not have,


as a preprocessor and virtual base classes. While no definitive answer is
possible since eventually one starts comparing apples to oranges, what in
your view makes C++ more powerful than D?

C++ supports C headers natively :-) D doesn't, and this is especially

 while writing programs using the Windows API. Indeed, there is a hint of

 Win32-API headers in the phobos library, but they are not nearly enough to

 a useful program. Also, a lot of functions that are supported by D have an

 attached to them. Of course, this has to do with the unicode definitions

 but it is not very handy to have to look up the D definitions every time

 want to use a function. Or, for that matter, to have to export a lot of
 functions myself to support even the most basic things as posting

 adressing dialog items.
 So if you define powerful as being able to easily make user-friendly Win32

 then C++ is way more powerful.
 As for my wishlist, you can guess: I would like the full Win32-API headers

 you download D, and aliased without the A's. This would also cause people

 choose immediately for C++ programming an application because D can't, or

 after a lot of typing.

Jan 12 2004
parent reply Mark Arts <Mark_member pathlink.com> writes:
This has nothing to do with the language itself, but with documentation and
library support.

Indeed it does. But I read here on the forum that people want this language to be popular. Don't get me wrong, I totally agree with that. But to become widely used, doesn't it have to have a large library support? Either written in D, of which there are almost none, or by using e.g. C(++) libraries easily. And I don't think having to export every function in a library is easy. Do you?
Jan 12 2004
next sibling parent reply "Lars Ivar Igesund" <larsivar igesund.net> writes:
"Mark Arts" <Mark_member pathlink.com> wrote in message
news:btu1em$ti5$1 digitaldaemon.com...
This has nothing to do with the language itself, but with documentation


library support.

Indeed it does. But I read here on the forum that people want this

 be popular. Don't get me wrong, I totally agree with that. But to become

 used, doesn't it have to have a large library support? Either written in

 which there are almost none, or by using e.g. C(++) libraries easily. And

 don't think having to export every function in a library is easy. Do you?

Of course not :) I just highly doubt that the documentation and library support for C/C++ were anywhere near as good as D's when they were new. (Not that I'm old enough to remember...) Lars Ivar Igesund
Jan 12 2004
parent Mark Arts <Mark_member pathlink.com> writes:
 Indeed it does. But I read here on the forum that people want this

 be popular. Don't get me wrong, I totally agree with that. But to become

 used, doesn't it have to have a large library support? Either written in

 which there are almost none, or by using e.g. C(++) libraries easily. And

 don't think having to export every function in a library is easy. Do you?

Of course not :) I just highly doubt that the documentation and library support for C/C++ were anywhere near as good as D's when they were new. (Not that I'm old enough to remember...)

goal: UNIX programming. So everyone who wanted to make a program for UNIX used C, even if it wasn't perfect, and it automatically got a large support. D doesn't have such a goal, and has to compete with lots of other languages. So if it is to become one of the major languages used, you have to start out with having this support, otherwise it won't become anything more than some language you use for fun.
Jan 12 2004
prev sibling parent Matthias Becker <Matthias_member pathlink.com> writes:
Indeed it does. But I read here on the forum that people want this language to
be popular. Don't get me wrong, I totally agree with that. But to become widely
used, doesn't it have to have a large library support? Either written in D, of
which there are almost none, or by using e.g. C(++) libraries easily. And I
don't think having to export every function in a library is easy. Do you?

Jan 12 2004
prev sibling next sibling parent "Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> writes:
"Mark Arts" <Mark_member pathlink.com> wrote in message
news:bttpa0$fp7$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 C++ supports C headers natively :-) D doesn't,

Supporting C headers natively essentially means adding a C compiler into D. That's kinda beyond the scope :-(
 and this is especially annoying
 while writing programs using the Windows API. Indeed, there is a hint of

 Win32-API headers in the phobos library, but they are not nearly enough to

 a useful program.

I understand the win32 api headers are inadequate, and hope to address that soon.
Jan 12 2004
prev sibling next sibling parent reply "C" <dont respond.com> writes:
http://hp.vector.co.jp/authors/VA028375/contents/D_windows.h.html

Can we PLEASE execpt this is at the standard ?  These are generated by a
perl script , so updating would not be a problem , and I have yet to find a
function thats not covered by this library.  I've been using for months with
no problems at all!

C


"Mark Arts" <Mark_member pathlink.com> wrote in message
news:bttpa0$fp7$1 digitaldaemon.com...
D has many very powerful features that C++ does not have, such as nested
functions and inline assembly. C++ has features that D does not have,


as a preprocessor and virtual base classes. While no definitive answer is
possible since eventually one starts comparing apples to oranges, what in
your view makes C++ more powerful than D?

C++ supports C headers natively :-) D doesn't, and this is especially

 while writing programs using the Windows API. Indeed, there is a hint of

 Win32-API headers in the phobos library, but they are not nearly enough to

 a useful program. Also, a lot of functions that are supported by D have an

 attached to them. Of course, this has to do with the unicode definitions

 but it is not very handy to have to look up the D definitions every time

 want to use a function. Or, for that matter, to have to export a lot of
 functions myself to support even the most basic things as posting

 adressing dialog items.
 So if you define powerful as being able to easily make user-friendly Win32

 then C++ is way more powerful.
 As for my wishlist, you can guess: I would like the full Win32-API headers

 you download D, and aliased without the A's. This would also cause people

 choose immediately for C++ programming an application because D can't, or

 after a lot of typing.

Jan 12 2004
next sibling parent reply Matthias Becker <Matthias_member pathlink.com> writes:
http://hp.vector.co.jp/authors/VA028375/contents/D_windows.h.html

Can we PLEASE execpt this is at the standard ?  These are generated by a
perl script , so updating would not be a problem , and I have yet to find a
function thats not covered by this library.  I've been using for months with
no problems at all!

C

Mac port (I hope there will), would I be able to use it: No. But hey, you suggest it as part of the standard, but I can't use it on most of the platforms, that will hopefully be supported in the future (and partitaly allready are (Linux)).
Jan 12 2004
next sibling parent reply "C" <dont respond.com> writes:
Can you use the current phobos win32 headers on Linux / Mac ?

C
"Matthias Becker" <Matthias_member pathlink.com> wrote in message
news:btum6u$1vuj$1 digitaldaemon.com...
http://hp.vector.co.jp/authors/VA028375/contents/D_windows.h.html

Can we PLEASE execpt this is at the standard ?  These are generated by a
perl script , so updating would not be a problem , and I have yet to find


function thats not covered by this library.  I've been using for months


no problems at all!

C


 Mac port (I hope there will), would I be able to use it: No. But hey, you
 suggest it as part of the standard, but I can't use it on most of the

 that will hopefully be supported in the future (and partitaly allready are
 (Linux)).

Jan 12 2004
parent reply Matthias Becker <Matthias_member pathlink.com> writes:
Can you use the current phobos win32 headers on Linux / Mac ?

Do we have to make mistakes we did in the past again and again? Compiler-vendors may deliver something like this with their compiler, but making it a part of the standard-library is stupip. Perhaps a special definition of library-extentions for specific platforms would be an idea, so you have an advanced set for Windows (Win32 stuff), Unix (POSIX, ...) and so on. It's OK, if there is a stanrad, but IMO it mustn't be a part of THE D-Standard.
Jan 13 2004
next sibling parent reply davepermen <davepermen_member pathlink.com> writes:
we should bether have some sort of standard - place, where we can share all
components together. that way, if you want to use win32, you download the win32
package of d. if you want to use opengl, you take the opengl package.. sdl? sdl
package. image loading? FreeImage package (wich i made last night), etc..

one common place for sources, and libraries. but the std, free of anything
"useful".. merely something like stl, a.k.a. often required generic tools

In article <bu1ab9$92u$1 digitaldaemon.com>, Matthias Becker says...
Can you use the current phobos win32 headers on Linux / Mac ?

Do we have to make mistakes we did in the past again and again? Compiler-vendors may deliver something like this with their compiler, but making it a part of the standard-library is stupip. Perhaps a special definition of library-extentions for specific platforms would be an idea, so you have an advanced set for Windows (Win32 stuff), Unix (POSIX, ...) and so on. It's OK, if there is a stanrad, but IMO it mustn't be a part of THE D-Standard.

Jan 13 2004
parent reply "C" <dont respond.com> writes:
Cool can you send me the freeimage package ?  I use that for C++ also.

C

"davepermen" <davepermen_member pathlink.com> wrote in message
news:bu1bhd$b46$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 we should bether have some sort of standard - place, where we can share

 components together. that way, if you want to use win32, you download the

 package of d. if you want to use opengl, you take the opengl package..

 package. image loading? FreeImage package (wich i made last night), etc..

 one common place for sources, and libraries. but the std, free of anything
 "useful".. merely something like stl, a.k.a. often required generic tools

 In article <bu1ab9$92u$1 digitaldaemon.com>, Matthias Becker says...
Can you use the current phobos win32 headers on Linux / Mac ?

Do we have to make mistakes we did in the past again and again? Compiler-vendors may deliver something like this with their compiler, but


it a part of the standard-library is stupip. Perhaps a special definition


library-extentions for specific platforms would be an idea, so you have


advanced set for Windows (Win32 stuff), Unix (POSIX, ...) and so on.

It's OK, if there is a stanrad, but IMO it mustn't be a part of THE




Jan 13 2004
next sibling parent davepermen <davepermen_member pathlink.com> writes:
i'd prefer to put that into
"THE BIG D LIBRARY TREE FOR EVERYONE"
so that anyone can use it.. :D

for the time being, its in my shares.. http://davepermen.net.. just download the
lib.rar and phobos.rar i think, there it should be in..

it doesn't have all features (heck, it ***ing late, even simple enums porting 
was VERY CONCENTRATION REQUESTING! wich i didn't had:D). so all stuff with
function pointers isn't in yet..

enough to display a texture in opengl.. :D

both an opengl and an sdl share should get into "THE BIG D LIBRARY TREE FOR
EVERYONE".. :D

In article <bu1dbq$ebg$1 digitaldaemon.com>, C says...
Cool can you send me the freeimage package ?  I use that for C++ also.

C

"davepermen" <davepermen_member pathlink.com> wrote in message
news:bu1bhd$b46$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 we should bether have some sort of standard - place, where we can share

 components together. that way, if you want to use win32, you download the

 package of d. if you want to use opengl, you take the opengl package..

 package. image loading? FreeImage package (wich i made last night), etc..

 one common place for sources, and libraries. but the std, free of anything
 "useful".. merely something like stl, a.k.a. often required generic tools

 In article <bu1ab9$92u$1 digitaldaemon.com>, Matthias Becker says...
Can you use the current phobos win32 headers on Linux / Mac ?

Do we have to make mistakes we did in the past again and again? Compiler-vendors may deliver something like this with their compiler, but


it a part of the standard-library is stupip. Perhaps a special definition


library-extentions for specific platforms would be an idea, so you have


advanced set for Windows (Win32 stuff), Unix (POSIX, ...) and so on.

It's OK, if there is a stanrad, but IMO it mustn't be a part of THE





Jan 13 2004
prev sibling parent reply davepermen <davepermen_member pathlink.com> writes:
In article <bu1dbq$ebg$1 digitaldaemon.com>, C says...
Cool can you send me the freeimage package ?  I use that for C++ also.

C

Once I get home, I can share it. It's selfinstalling into the C:\ path, containing etc.c.FreeImage // the converted original header \dmd\lib\FreeImage.lib // the converted original lib \dmd\lib\freeImage.dll // somewhere we should store it :D and etc.freeImage // a small D class and some functions \dmd\lib\freeImage.obj // the compiled version of it usage: import etc.freeImage; // import etc.c.FreeImage; // if you need to Image image = loadImage("stone.jpg"); or, in my case, i often need it as 32bit rgba => Image image = loadImage("stone.jpg").to32Bits(); and, for example in opengl: glTexImage2D( GL_TEXTURE_2D, 0, GL_RGBA8, image.width, image.height, 0, GL_RGBA, GL_UNSIGNED_BYTE, image.data ); As i said: Once I'm at home. I'm really interested in setting up a common source-share. An online etc where everyone can contribute. That way, we would quickly be able to addopt a lot of stuff. Direct Ports of c libraries get plugged into etc.c.*, rewritten D style libraries for easy use in a modern way gets plugged into etc.* I'd rewrite sdl and opengl to fit into that sheme, as well as I could finalize the FreeImage port. Of course, there could be tons of stuff ported. But that way, nobody ports twice.
Jan 13 2004
next sibling parent reply J Anderson <REMOVEanderson badmama.com.au> writes:
I'm really interested in setting up a common source-share. An online etc where
everyone can contribute. That way, we would quickly be able to addopt a lot of
stuff.

  

J C set up that d yahoo groups website http://groups.yahoo.com/group/d_lab. But a specially built share-site (with more space), could be better. Of course there's Benji's sourceforge like thing, but that'll probably be a while in coming. -Anderson
Jan 14 2004
parent reply "Matthew" <matthew.hat stlsoft.dot.org> writes:
"J Anderson" <REMOVEanderson badmama.com.au> wrote in message
news:bu2trj$3146$1 digitaldaemon.com...
I'm really interested in setting up a common source-share. An online etc


everyone can contribute. That way, we would quickly be able to addopt a


stuff.

J C set up that d yahoo groups website

 But a specially built share-site (with more space), could be better.  Of
 course there's Benji's sourceforge like thing, but that'll probably be a
 while in coming.

What's happened to that? It's taken nearly as long as The D Journal to get going. Benji, take one step forward. We need you. :)
Jan 14 2004
parent J C Calvarese <jcc7 cox.net> writes:
Matthew wrote:
 What's happened to that? It's taken nearly as long as The D Journal to get
 going.
 
 Benji, take one step forward. We need you. :)
 

D/15099 I think his last message was December 3, 2003: D/19803 I think he got caught up with real life. A pity. It sounded like he had a great plan. I hope he's doing ok. -- Justin http://jcc_7.tripod.com/d/
Jan 14 2004
prev sibling parent davepermen <davepermen_member pathlink.com> writes:
Ok, Done.

It's on my Page now. http://davepermen.net

The direct Link is: http://davepermen.homeip.net/Shared/freeImage.exe

an example using it can follow.
(i've combined it with dig, to have there bitmaps loaded of all supported
freeImage types.. quite fun short piece of code, hehe)

I'd be happy to see more of the addon libs directly installable into the etc
folder, and collect them. my server is just too slow for it. 100kbits upload..
urgh:D will be 200 soon, but still.

In article <bu2q55$2qhb$1 digitaldaemon.com>, davepermen says...
In article <bu1dbq$ebg$1 digitaldaemon.com>, C says...
Cool can you send me the freeimage package ?  I use that for C++ also.

C

Once I get home, I can share it. It's selfinstalling into the C:\ path, containing etc.c.FreeImage // the converted original header \dmd\lib\FreeImage.lib // the converted original lib \dmd\lib\freeImage.dll // somewhere we should store it :D and etc.freeImage // a small D class and some functions \dmd\lib\freeImage.obj // the compiled version of it usage: import etc.freeImage; // import etc.c.FreeImage; // if you need to Image image = loadImage("stone.jpg"); or, in my case, i often need it as 32bit rgba => Image image = loadImage("stone.jpg").to32Bits(); and, for example in opengl: glTexImage2D( GL_TEXTURE_2D, 0, GL_RGBA8, image.width, image.height, 0, GL_RGBA, GL_UNSIGNED_BYTE, image.data ); As i said: Once I'm at home. I'm really interested in setting up a common source-share. An online etc where everyone can contribute. That way, we would quickly be able to addopt a lot of stuff. Direct Ports of c libraries get plugged into etc.c.*, rewritten D style libraries for easy use in a modern way gets plugged into etc.* I'd rewrite sdl and opengl to fit into that sheme, as well as I could finalize the FreeImage port. Of course, there could be tons of stuff ported. But that way, nobody ports twice.

Jan 14 2004
prev sibling next sibling parent reply "C" <dont respond.com> writes:
What mistakes are you refering to ?  On one hand we have people say the
library will never be enough to compete with .net , on the other hand you
got people that don't want anything in the standard library.  My original
stance was to remove platform specific components , but since its likely
that wont happen , then lets adpot some usable win32 headers.

C

"Matthias Becker" <Matthias_member pathlink.com> wrote in message
news:bu1ab9$92u$1 digitaldaemon.com...
Can you use the current phobos win32 headers on Linux / Mac ?

Do we have to make mistakes we did in the past again and again? Compiler-vendors may deliver something like this with their compiler, but

 it a part of the standard-library is stupip. Perhaps a special definition

 library-extentions for specific platforms would be an idea, so you have an
 advanced set for Windows (Win32 stuff), Unix (POSIX, ...) and so on.

 It's OK, if there is a stanrad, but IMO it mustn't be a part of THE


Jan 13 2004
parent Matthias Becker <Matthias_member pathlink.com> writes:
On one hand we have people say the
library will never be enough to compete with .net , on the other hand you
got people that don't want anything in the standard library.  My original
stance was to remove platform specific components , but since its likely
that wont happen , then lets adpot some usable win32 headers.

I want to have something that can compete with .Net. But .Net theortically doesn't depend on windows, while win32 has it even in it's name.
Jan 14 2004
prev sibling parent Andy Friesen <Andy_member pathlink.com> writes:
In article <bu1ab9$92u$1 digitaldaemon.com>, Matthias Becker says...
Can you use the current phobos win32 headers on Linux / Mac ?

Do we have to make mistakes we did in the past again and again? Compiler-vendors may deliver something like this with their compiler, but making it a part of the standard-library is stupip. Perhaps a special definition of library-extentions for specific platforms would be an idea, so you have an advanced set for Windows (Win32 stuff), Unix (POSIX, ...) and so on. It's OK, if there is a stanrad, but IMO it mustn't be a part of THE D-Standard.

Putting win32 headers in the 'standard library' is.... weird. win32 isn't exactly the sort of thing that belongs in a standard library. I don't think anybody is arguing that they should be, though. What does matter is whether it's packaged with DMD. (which it should be) At the very least, it could be linked on digitalmars.com in some obvious place. -- andy
Jan 13 2004
prev sibling parent reply "Sean L. Palmer" <palmer.sean verizon.net> writes:
This would go into the platform-specific section of the standard runtime
library, much as Win32 headers are included with every C/C++ compiler on the
Windows platform.  You wouldn't use them and probably wouldn't even have
them available on Linux or Mac.

But those of us who write Windows apps NEED a full suite of Win32 functions.
The existing Phobos one is far too incomplete to make any sort of simple app
with, let alone a real app.

Yeah, Win32 is going to go the way of the dinosaur soon, everything will
switch to .NET, but for now we have to have it.

Sean


"Matthias Becker" <Matthias_member pathlink.com> wrote in message
news:btum6u$1vuj$1 digitaldaemon.com...
http://hp.vector.co.jp/authors/VA028375/contents/D_windows.h.html

Can we PLEASE execpt this is at the standard ?  These are generated by a
perl script , so updating would not be a problem , and I have yet to find


function thats not covered by this library.  I've been using for months


no problems at all!

C


 Mac port (I hope there will), would I be able to use it: No. But hey, you
 suggest it as part of the standard, but I can't use it on most of the

 that will hopefully be supported in the future (and partitaly allready are
 (Linux)).

Jan 12 2004
parent Matthias Becker <Matthias_member pathlink.com> writes:
This would go into the platform-specific section of the standard runtime
library, much as Win32 headers are included with every C/C++ compiler on the
Windows platform.  You wouldn't use them and probably wouldn't even have
them available on Linux or Mac.

But those of us who write Windows apps NEED a full suite of Win32 functions.
The existing Phobos one is far too incomplete to make any sort of simple app
with, let alone a real app.

they DON'T "NEED a full suite of Win32 functions". There are .NET-coders who don't need it. There are people using gtk or Qt who don't need it. So you DON'T NEED a full suit of Win32 functions to write Windows apps.
Yeah, Win32 is going to go the way of the dinosaur soon, everything will
switch to .NET, but for now we have to have it.

We concentrate on the language itself, so we learn how to use it and to make suggestions how to improve it. We don't concern any platformspecific extensions, as they don't help us in developing the language itself. We think about general librarys and language-fatures that enable us to develope these librarys or or help us in general.
Jan 13 2004
prev sibling next sibling parent reply davepermen <davepermen_member pathlink.com> writes:
In article <btujk6$1rhk$1 digitaldaemon.com>, C says...
http://hp.vector.co.jp/authors/VA028375/contents/D_windows.h.html

Can we PLEASE execpt this is at the standard ?  These are generated by a
perl script , so updating would not be a problem , and I have yet to find a
function thats not covered by this library.  I've been using for months with
no problems at all!

C

YEP. just remove all the // lines, and we can use this. plugged it in, replaced all stupid A and W, and all the manual written extern(Windows) BOOL ShowWindow(...) (HEY I HAD TO WRITE THAT ONE!!), and voilą, compiles flawlessly plug that in Walter, at least till you provide something bether..
Jan 12 2004
next sibling parent reply "C" <dont respond.com> writes:
 replaced all stupid A and W

These are usually correctly aliased depending if you are using win32.ansi , or win32 ( implied unicode ). C "davepermen" <davepermen_member pathlink.com> wrote in message news:btumg4$20fa$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 In article <btujk6$1rhk$1 digitaldaemon.com>, C says...
http://hp.vector.co.jp/authors/VA028375/contents/D_windows.h.html

Can we PLEASE execpt this is at the standard ?  These are generated by a
perl script , so updating would not be a problem , and I have yet to find


function thats not covered by this library.  I've been using for months


no problems at all!

C

YEP. just remove all the // lines, and we can use this. plugged it in,

 all stupid A and W, and all the manual written extern(Windows) BOOL
 ShowWindow(...) (HEY I HAD TO WRITE THAT ONE!!), and voilą, compiles

 plug that in Walter, at least till you provide something bether..

Jan 12 2004
parent davepermen <davepermen_member pathlink.com> writes:
i was talking about the OLD ones.

In article <btun37$21e9$1 digitaldaemon.com>, C says...
 replaced all stupid A and W

These are usually correctly aliased depending if you are using win32.ansi , or win32 ( implied unicode ). C "davepermen" <davepermen_member pathlink.com> wrote in message news:btumg4$20fa$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 In article <btujk6$1rhk$1 digitaldaemon.com>, C says...
http://hp.vector.co.jp/authors/VA028375/contents/D_windows.h.html

Can we PLEASE execpt this is at the standard ?  These are generated by a
perl script , so updating would not be a problem , and I have yet to find


function thats not covered by this library.  I've been using for months


no problems at all!

C

YEP. just remove all the // lines, and we can use this. plugged it in,

 all stupid A and W, and all the manual written extern(Windows) BOOL
 ShowWindow(...) (HEY I HAD TO WRITE THAT ONE!!), and voilą, compiles

 plug that in Walter, at least till you provide something bether..


Jan 12 2004
prev sibling parent reply "C" <dont respond.com> writes:
$ grep -rn ShowWindow .
./ansi/winbase.d:2627:  WORD wShowWindow;
./ansi/winbase.d:2650:  WORD wShowWindow;
./ansi/winuser.d:2934:extern(Windows) export BOOL ShowWindow(
./ansi/winuser.d:2983:extern(Windows) export BOOL ShowWindowAsync(
./winbase.d:2918:  WORD wShowWindow;
./winbase.d:2941:  WORD wShowWindow;
./winuser.d:2934:extern(Windows) export BOOL ShowWindow(
./winuser.d:2983:extern(Windows) export BOOL ShowWindowAsync(

Seems its in winuser.

C
"davepermen" <davepermen_member pathlink.com> wrote in message
news:btumg4$20fa$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 In article <btujk6$1rhk$1 digitaldaemon.com>, C says...
http://hp.vector.co.jp/authors/VA028375/contents/D_windows.h.html

Can we PLEASE execpt this is at the standard ?  These are generated by a
perl script , so updating would not be a problem , and I have yet to find


function thats not covered by this library.  I've been using for months


no problems at all!

C

YEP. just remove all the // lines, and we can use this. plugged it in,

 all stupid A and W, and all the manual written extern(Windows) BOOL
 ShowWindow(...) (HEY I HAD TO WRITE THAT ONE!!), and voilą, compiles

 plug that in Walter, at least till you provide something bether..

Jan 12 2004
parent davepermen <davepermen_member pathlink.com> writes:
again i was talking about the OLD ones.

In article <btun6j$21j9$1 digitaldaemon.com>, C says...
$ grep -rn ShowWindow .
./ansi/winbase.d:2627:  WORD wShowWindow;
./ansi/winbase.d:2650:  WORD wShowWindow;
./ansi/winuser.d:2934:extern(Windows) export BOOL ShowWindow(
./ansi/winuser.d:2983:extern(Windows) export BOOL ShowWindowAsync(
./winbase.d:2918:  WORD wShowWindow;
./winbase.d:2941:  WORD wShowWindow;
./winuser.d:2934:extern(Windows) export BOOL ShowWindow(
./winuser.d:2983:extern(Windows) export BOOL ShowWindowAsync(

Seems its in winuser.

C
"davepermen" <davepermen_member pathlink.com> wrote in message
news:btumg4$20fa$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 In article <btujk6$1rhk$1 digitaldaemon.com>, C says...
http://hp.vector.co.jp/authors/VA028375/contents/D_windows.h.html

Can we PLEASE execpt this is at the standard ?  These are generated by a
perl script , so updating would not be a problem , and I have yet to find


function thats not covered by this library.  I've been using for months


no problems at all!

C

YEP. just remove all the // lines, and we can use this. plugged it in,

 all stupid A and W, and all the manual written extern(Windows) BOOL
 ShowWindow(...) (HEY I HAD TO WRITE THAT ONE!!), and voilą, compiles

 plug that in Walter, at least till you provide something bether..


Jan 12 2004
prev sibling parent reply J C Calvarese <jcc7 cox.net> writes:
C wrote:
 http://hp.vector.co.jp/authors/VA028375/contents/D_windows.h.html
 
 Can we PLEASE execpt this is at the standard ?  These are generated by a
 perl script , so updating would not be a problem , and I have yet to find a
 function thats not covered by this library.  I've been using for months with
 no problems at all!
 
 C

I agree. Y. Tomino's headers are probably the best set to use as a "standard". I've used them some and I like that they are produced from a public script, they don't depend on std.c.windows.windows, and there's an ansi set AND a Unicode set (so everybody's happy). Something I've noticed is that -- as far as I can tell -- COM isn't included in this set. I suppose someone (possibly myself) could modify Mike Wynn's COM library to make use of Tomino's headers (and not depend on std.c.windows.com). Mike's stuff is found at http://www.geocities.com/one_mad_alien/dcom_not_dcom.html By the way, I don't have anything against std.c.windows.com. The problem using it is that when Walter improves it by including new constants, aliases, and declarations, stuff in the previously-working file starts causes conflicts. http://www.dprogramming.com/dwindows.php Also, I haven't tried it out yet, but Vathix has created some header files, too. It also looks like he's updated Pavel's old windows.d (the old version is still at http://int19h.tamb.ru/files.html). -- Justin http://jcc_7.tripod.com/d/
Jan 12 2004
parent "C" <dont respond.com> writes:
Ohhh if you could get Mike's COM work to work with Y.T's win32 that would be
sweet.  Get to it! :)

C
"J C Calvarese" <jcc7 cox.net> wrote in message
news:btvrb7$r8e$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 C wrote:
 http://hp.vector.co.jp/authors/VA028375/contents/D_windows.h.html

 Can we PLEASE execpt this is at the standard ?  These are generated by a
 perl script , so updating would not be a problem , and I have yet to


 function thats not covered by this library.  I've been using for months


 no problems at all!

 C

I agree. Y. Tomino's headers are probably the best set to use as a "standard". I've used them some and I like that they are produced from a public script, they don't depend on std.c.windows.windows, and there's an ansi set AND a Unicode set (so everybody's happy). Something I've noticed is that -- as far as I can tell -- COM isn't included in this set. I suppose someone (possibly myself) could modify Mike Wynn's COM library to make use of Tomino's headers (and not depend on std.c.windows.com). Mike's stuff is found at http://www.geocities.com/one_mad_alien/dcom_not_dcom.html By the way, I don't have anything against std.c.windows.com. The problem using it is that when Walter improves it by including new constants, aliases, and declarations, stuff in the previously-working file starts causes conflicts. http://www.dprogramming.com/dwindows.php Also, I haven't tried it out yet, but Vathix has created some header files, too. It also looks like he's updated Pavel's old windows.d (the old version is still at http://int19h.tamb.ru/files.html). -- Justin http://jcc_7.tripod.com/d/

Jan 12 2004
prev sibling parent reply Matthias Becker <Matthias_member pathlink.com> writes:
C++ supports C headers natively :-) D doesn't, and this is especially annoying
while writing programs using the Windows API. Indeed, there is a hint of some
Win32-API headers in the phobos library, but they are not nearly enough to make
a useful program. 

inlcude C headers nativaly, but I AM able to make usefull programs.
Also, a lot of functions that are supported by D have an A
attached to them. Of course, this has to do with the unicode definitions of C++,
but it is not very handy to have to look up the D definitions every time you
want to use a function. Or, for that matter, to have to export a lot of
functions myself to support even the most basic things as posting messages, and
adressing dialog items.
So if you define powerful as being able to easily make user-friendly Win32 apps,
then C++ is way more powerful.

Using .NET is much more convenient. So all the .Net-languages (C#, managed C++, VB.NET, Eiffel (however the extensionis called), ...) are VERY user-friendly in making Win32 apps.
As for my wishlist, you can guess: I would like the full Win32-API headers when
you download D, and aliased without the A's. This would also cause people not to
choose immediately for C++ programming an application because D can't, or only
after a lot of typing.

the .NET framework (which seems to be impossible if D doesn't become a language that is compiled to MSIL) would be what I'd like to see.
Jan 12 2004
parent "Bruce Dodson" <bruce_dodson hotmail.com> writes:
Not impossible.  Look at PerlNET for example.

"Matthias Becker" <Matthias_member pathlink.com> wrote in message
news:btulkc$1ut1$1 digitaldaemon.com...

 I wouldn't like this very much. Wrapping them or what ever or a way to

 the .NET framework (which seems to be impossible if D doesn't become a

 that is compiled to MSIL) would be what I'd like to see.

Jan 14 2004
prev sibling next sibling parent Antti =?iso-8859-1?Q?Syk=E4ri?= <jsykari gamma.hut.fi> writes:
In article <btsa5r$11rk$1 digitaldaemon.com>, Walter wrote:
 There is no C++-Standard before C++98. So this is version 1.0 and
 it's still more powerfull that D.

D has many very powerful features that C++ does not have, such as nested functions and inline assembly. C++ has features that D does not have, such as a preprocessor and virtual base classes. While no definitive answer is possible since eventually one starts comparing apples to oranges, what in your view makes C++ more powerful than D?

Did someone mention operator overloading for freestanding functions? ;) (About which, by the way, I'm sure there is some kind of solution that is so simple that after discovering it everybody thinks "Now why on earth didn't we think about *that*?") -Antti
Jan 12 2004
prev sibling parent reply Matthias Becker <Matthias_member pathlink.com> writes:
D has many very powerful features that C++ does not have, such as nested
functions and inline assembly. C++ has features that D does not have, such
as a preprocessor and virtual base classes. While no definitive answer is
possible since eventually one starts comparing apples to oranges, what in
your view makes C++ more powerful than D?

me). Most C++ compilers have this ability, too. And if I use such a feature I become somewhat unportable so it doesn't matter that I use a compiler specific extension. For me it's only important that my programm runs on a Windows-PC and A MacOS X Mac. I use stuff like template-templates from time to time. This is a VERY powerfull thing. And AFAIK only C++ supports this. Anyway D's generic ability are much better in the new version. This is the first version of D that I realy like. Maybe version 1.0 will be a real alternative. BTW, what about mixins? Are they alredy implemented (seen anything about them). If not, are they still planed to be implemented?
Jan 12 2004
next sibling parent reply "Walter" <walter digitalmars.com> writes:
"Matthias Becker" <Matthias_member pathlink.com> wrote in message
news:btukae$1sq6$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 Inline assmbly isn't realy (at least for
 me). Most C++ compilers have this ability, too.

True, most C++ compilers have it, but as an extension. It is not part of the language.
 I use stuff like template-templates from time to time. This is a VERY

 thing. And AFAIK only C++ supports this.

D supports it now! (The template alias parameters.)
 Anyway D's generic ability are much better in the new version. This is the

 version of D that I realy like.
 Maybe version 1.0 will be a real alternative.
 BTW, what about mixins? Are they alredy implemented (seen anything about

 If not, are they still planed to be implemented?

2.0!
Jan 12 2004
parent Matthias Becker <Matthias_member pathlink.com> writes:
 I use stuff like template-templates from time to time. This is a VERY

 thing. And AFAIK only C++ supports this.

D supports it now! (The template alias parameters.)

 ...


I seems like I have to wait for a long time.
Jan 13 2004
prev sibling parent reply "C" <dont respond.com> writes:
You seem to have very limited vision.  Because you don't use its not an
important language feature ?

And refereing to another post, many of us use D on a daily basis.  I now use
it more than C++ , perhaps you should start using it , maybe the actual use
of the language will give you some insight.

C

"Matthias Becker" <Matthias_member pathlink.com> wrote in message
news:btukae$1sq6$1 digitaldaemon.com...
D has many very powerful features that C++ does not have, such as nested
functions and inline assembly. C++ has features that D does not have,


as a preprocessor and virtual base classes. While no definitive answer is
possible since eventually one starts comparing apples to oranges, what in
your view makes C++ more powerful than D?


 me). Most C++ compilers have this ability, too. And if I use such a

 become somewhat unportable so it doesn't matter that I use a compiler

 extension.
 For me it's only important that my programm runs on a Windows-PC and A

 Mac.
 I use stuff like template-templates from time to time. This is a VERY

 thing. And AFAIK only C++ supports this.

 Anyway D's generic ability are much better in the new version. This is the

 version of D that I realy like.
 Maybe version 1.0 will be a real alternative.
 BTW, what about mixins? Are they alredy implemented (seen anything about

 If not, are they still planed to be implemented?

Jan 13 2004
parent reply Matthias Becker <Matthias_member pathlink.com> writes:
You seem to have very limited vision.  Because you don't use its not an
important language feature ?

What are you refering to?
And refereing to another post, many of us use D on a daily basis.  I now use
it more than C++ , perhaps you should start using it , maybe the actual use
of the language will give you some insight.

That's a somewhat bad idea, isn't it? D just changes way too often. You couldn't finish any project without redoing almoast everything several times. Anyway, I use it, but only for experimenting.
Jan 14 2004
parent reply "C" <dont respond.com> writes:
 That's a somewhat bad idea, isn't it? D just changes way too often. You

 finish any project without redoing almoast everything several times.

news:bu40qt$1o8i$1 digitaldaemon.com...
You seem to have very limited vision.  Because you don't use its not an
important language feature ?

What are you refering to?
And refereing to another post, many of us use D on a daily basis.  I now


it more than C++ , perhaps you should start using it , maybe the actual


of the language will give you some insight.

That's a somewhat bad idea, isn't it? D just changes way too often. You

 finish any project without redoing almoast everything several times.

 Anyway, I use it, but only for experimenting.

Jan 14 2004
parent "C" <dont respond.com> writes:
 That's a somewhat bad idea, isn't it? D just changes way too often. You

 finish any project without redoing almoast everything several times.

Oops , yes that was a problem , as dig doesnt compile any more , nor do some other libraries , but with the standarization coming in March I think that'll take care of it. If you keep your code up to date with each release ( which admittedly was a pain , but better to get the language right ) it wasnt that big a problem. C "C" <dont respond.com> wrote in message news:bu454o$1vfb$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 That's a somewhat bad idea, isn't it? D just changes way too often. You

 finish any project without redoing almoast everything several times.

news:bu40qt$1o8i$1 digitaldaemon.com...
You seem to have very limited vision.  Because you don't use its not an
important language feature ?

What are you refering to?
And refereing to another post, many of us use D on a daily basis.  I



 use
it more than C++ , perhaps you should start using it , maybe the actual


of the language will give you some insight.

That's a somewhat bad idea, isn't it? D just changes way too often. You

 finish any project without redoing almoast everything several times.

 Anyway, I use it, but only for experimenting.


Jan 14 2004
prev sibling next sibling parent "Elohe" <GODA-XEN terra.es> writes:
I only like to born my ideal language, now the D is the most near but lack
vaerious capabilitities, a special implementation of threats ( Sthreats )
for eterogenius programing, one Sthreat can only comunicate to other via
monodirectionals buffers, calls and signals.
we create a buffer and it only can be modified by only the Sthreat on it is
declared as output and read by the Sthreat on its is declared as receptor(
example, we have a Sthreat for the gui an the other for the main , we
decared a OpenGL buffer, its can be only modified by the main but the gui
can be acces to it for screeninhg it).
a Sthreat can be call a fuction in other Sthreat.
a Sthreat can send a signal to other Sthreat like a soft interruption.
a Sthreat can start or stop any other Sthreat but can't repeated Sthreats in
the same program.
a Sthreat is a dinamic code and it have funtions to make it extensible(like
plug ings but in reality are xtension of the code, wen we ad a external code
the program nad its is only on file but it can modifie various Sthreats) or
fixed.
4 Sthreats = 4 threats
4 threats <= Sthreats
their declaration are easy using a Sthreat in the start of the main fuction
of the Sthreat and this function are declared in a declaration Sthreats file
in a latent or cative initial state.
A similar to html language extension for make a mode of easy programing a
gui but only can be used in on of the runing Sthreat, this can be compatible
with other gui interfaces and extensible.
...
sorry for my bad english
Jan 07 2004
prev sibling parent reply Stewart Gordon <smjg_1998 yahoo.com> writes:
While it was 1/1/04 12:03 am throughout the UK, Mark T sprinkled little 
black dots on a white screen, and they fell thus:
 I really only have 1
 
 1) That the D language version 1.0 is finalized and released in 2004. The
window
 of opportunity closes a little each year for getting a new language off the
 ground and adopted by a decent sized developer community so it doesn't die a
 premature death.  I can't use it at work unless it becomes popular.

Good idea I reckon. Especially: (a) implementation of array arithmetic (b) getting std.file.read and std.file.write working Re (a): which are actually supposed to be supported? DMD 0.77 reports a mixture of coding errors and not implemented errors when I try them. - array op scalar - array op array - scalar op array - array op= scalar - array op= array - ... on which operations? Should each work on all of +, -, *, / and whichever others? 2) Array aggregate properties like sum, product, maximum and minimum. This would have its potential for parallelisation, and also lead to a nice, concise notation for the dot product of vectors: (v1 * v2).sum Of course putting maximum and minimum in raises the issue of avoiding confusion with the .max and .min properties on data types. 3) A Mac OS X implementation, I guess. OK, so maybe the chances of 1, 2 and 3 being completed before I finish my PhD are fairly slim.... Stewart. -- My e-mail is valid but not my primary mailbox, aside from its being the unfortunate victim of intensive mail-bombing at the moment. Please keep replies on the 'group where everyone may benefit.
Jan 13 2004
parent "Sean L. Palmer" <palmer.sean verizon.net> writes:
A general way of applying any infix operator between each pair of adjacent
items in the array, would be desirable.  In Haskell and other functional
languages this is usually called foldl or foldr I believe.

something like:

(+)(a[]*a[]) // squared length of vector a

Should be able to get it to work with min and max also.  There's already
sum(), min(), and max() functions that take arrays, overloaded for many
common types.  But that's not a general solution.

Sean

"Stewart Gordon" <smjg_1998 yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:bu1cgg$cnm$1 digitaldaemon.com...
 While it was 1/1/04 12:03 am throughout the UK, Mark T sprinkled little
 black dots on a white screen, and they fell thus:
 I really only have 1

 1) That the D language version 1.0 is finalized and released in 2004.


 of opportunity closes a little each year for getting a new language off


 ground and adopted by a decent sized developer community so it doesn't


 premature death.  I can't use it at work unless it becomes popular.

Good idea I reckon. Especially: (a) implementation of array arithmetic (b) getting std.file.read and std.file.write working Re (a): which are actually supposed to be supported? DMD 0.77 reports a mixture of coding errors and not implemented errors when I try them. - array op scalar - array op array - scalar op array - array op= scalar - array op= array - ... on which operations? Should each work on all of +, -, *, / and whichever others? 2) Array aggregate properties like sum, product, maximum and minimum. This would have its potential for parallelisation, and also lead to a nice, concise notation for the dot product of vectors: (v1 * v2).sum Of course putting maximum and minimum in raises the issue of avoiding confusion with the .max and .min properties on data types. 3) A Mac OS X implementation, I guess. OK, so maybe the chances of 1, 2 and 3 being completed before I finish my PhD are fairly slim.... Stewart.

Jan 21 2004