www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D.announce - The D Programming Language by Andrei Alexandrescu

reply Walter Bright <newshound1 digitalmars.com> writes:
Andrei has announced on his web site http://erdani.org/ that he's 
working on the book "The D Programming Language" due out in October of 1998.
Dec 06 2007
next sibling parent reply Gregor Richards <Richards codu.org> writes:
Walter Bright wrote:
 Andrei has announced on his web site http://erdani.org/ that he's 
 working on the book "The D Programming Language" due out in October of 
 1998.

It's been out for nearly a decade and I still haven't bought it! I need to get with the program! - Gregor Richards
Dec 06 2007
next sibling parent reply "Craig Black" <cblack ara.com> writes:
"Gregor Richards" <Richards codu.org> wrote in message 
news:fj9mpv$1kjt$1 digitalmars.com...
 Walter Bright wrote:
 Andrei has announced on his web site http://erdani.org/ that he's working 
 on the book "The D Programming Language" due out in October of 1998.

It's been out for nearly a decade and I still haven't bought it! I need to get with the program! - Gregor Richards

Andrei is even smarter than I thought!
Dec 06 2007
parent "Jarrett Billingsley" <kb3ctd2 yahoo.com> writes:
"Craig Black" <cblack ara.com> wrote in message 
news:fj9mvi$1l4a$1 digitalmars.com...
 "Gregor Richards" <Richards codu.org> wrote in message 
 news:fj9mpv$1kjt$1 digitalmars.com...
 Walter Bright wrote:
 Andrei has announced on his web site http://erdani.org/ that he's 
 working on the book "The D Programming Language" due out in October of 
 1998.

It's been out for nearly a decade and I still haven't bought it! I need to get with the program! - Gregor Richards

Andrei is even smarter than I thought!

It really is an amazing idea! By writing a book and then releasing it ten years ago, he'll inspire Walter to write an implementation of the language, changing the past and making D1 come out years sooner. Or maybe this book is what inspired Walter in the first place, and Andrei just has to write the book to complete the time loop.
Dec 06 2007
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Walter Bright <newshound1 digitalmars.com> writes:
Gregor Richards wrote:
 Walter Bright wrote:
 Andrei has announced on his web site http://erdani.org/ that he's 
 working on the book "The D Programming Language" due out in October of 
 1998.


 
 It's been out for nearly a decade and I still haven't bought it! I need 
 to get with the program!

Aggh! I should proofread my own posts!
Dec 06 2007
parent Bill Baxter <dnewsgroup billbaxter.com> writes:
Walter Bright wrote:
 Gregor Richards wrote:
 Walter Bright wrote:
 Andrei has announced on his web site http://erdani.org/ that he's 
 working on the book "The D Programming Language" due out in October 
 of 1998.


 It's been out for nearly a decade and I still haven't bought it! I 
 need to get with the program!

Aggh! I should proofread my own posts!

Aggh! I should read all the responses before I point out the same mistake as 5 other people! --bb
Dec 06 2007
prev sibling parent Jan Claeys <digitalmars janc.be> writes:
Op Thu, 06 Dec 2007 12:58:31 -0800, schreef Walter Bright:

 Aggh! I should proofread my own posts!

Or you could try to borrow Guido's legendary time machine... ;-) -- JanC
Dec 08 2007
prev sibling next sibling parent Carlos Santander <csantander619 gmail.com> writes:
Walter Bright escribió:
 Andrei has announced on his web site http://erdani.org/ that he's 
 working on the book "The D Programming Language" due out in October of 
 1998.

Err... 2008. -- Carlos Santander Bernal
Dec 06 2007
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Clay Smith <clayasaurus gmail.com> writes:
Walter Bright wrote:
 Andrei has announced on his web site http://erdani.org/ that he's 
 working on the book "The D Programming Language" due out in October of 
 1998.

Nice! Two D books in 2 days. :)
Dec 06 2007
parent Bill Baxter <dnewsgroup billbaxter.com> writes:
Clay Smith wrote:
 Walter Bright wrote:
 Andrei has announced on his web site http://erdani.org/ that he's 
 working on the book "The D Programming Language" due out in October of 
 1998.


I think you mean 2008? ;-)
 Nice! Two D books in 2 days. :)

Indeed. --bb
Dec 06 2007
prev sibling parent reply Denton Cockburn <diboss hotmail.com> writes:
On Thu, 06 Dec 2007 12:35:41 -0800, Walter Bright wrote:

 Andrei has announced on his web site http://erdani.org/ that he's
 working on the book "The D Programming Language" due out in October of
 1998.

With a release date of a year away, I'm guessing he'll be putting forward the new things in D 2.0? These two books will be really good for D. Now the D-volution begins. (That still makes sense, you're remaking C++ properly)
Dec 06 2007
next sibling parent reply Walter Bright <newshound1 digitalmars.com> writes:
Denton Cockburn wrote:
 On Thu, 06 Dec 2007 12:35:41 -0800, Walter Bright wrote:
 
 Andrei has announced on his web site http://erdani.org/ that he's
 working on the book "The D Programming Language" due out in October of
 1998.

With a release date of a year away, I'm guessing he'll be putting forward the new things in D 2.0? These two books will be really good for D. Now the D-volution begins. (That still makes sense, you're remaking C++ properly)

The idea is that the book will represent D 2.0.
Dec 06 2007
parent reply eao197 <eao197 intervale.ru> writes:
On Fri, 07 Dec 2007 04:48:40 +0300, Walter Bright  
<newshound1 digitalmars.com> wrote:

 Denton Cockburn wrote:
 On Thu, 06 Dec 2007 12:35:41 -0800, Walter Bright wrote:

 Andrei has announced on his web site http://erdani.org/ that he's
 working on the book "The D Programming Language" due out in October of
 1998.

forward the new things in D 2.0? These two books will be really good for D. Now the D-volution begins. (That still makes sense, you're remaking C++ properly)

The idea is that the book will represent D 2.0.

Could we expect that D 2.0 will be stable enough at Oct 2008 and there won't be new compatibility-breaking changes in the language? -- Regards, Yauheni Akhotnikau
Dec 06 2007
next sibling parent reply Robert Fraser <fraserofthenight gmail.com> writes:
eao197 wrote:
 On Fri, 07 Dec 2007 04:48:40 +0300, Walter Bright 
 <newshound1 digitalmars.com> wrote:
 
 Denton Cockburn wrote:
 On Thu, 06 Dec 2007 12:35:41 -0800, Walter Bright wrote:

 Andrei has announced on his web site http://erdani.org/ that he's
 working on the book "The D Programming Language" due out in October of
 1998.

forward the new things in D 2.0? These two books will be really good for D. Now the D-volution begins. (That still makes sense, you're remaking C++ properly)

The idea is that the book will represent D 2.0.

Could we expect that D 2.0 will be stable enough at Oct 2008 and there won't be new compatibility-breaking changes in the language?

I hope it isn't. I like the fact that D is constantly evolving. Certainly, there's a bit of feature creep here & there, but overall it gives the feeling that D is certainly bridging the gap between programming paradigms and presenting itself as a modern language.
Dec 06 2007
next sibling parent eao197 <eao197 intervale.ru> writes:
On Fri, 07 Dec 2007 09:22:10 +0300, Robert Fraser  
<fraserofthenight gmail.com> wrote:

 eao197 wrote:
 On Fri, 07 Dec 2007 04:48:40 +0300, Walter Bright  
 <newshound1 digitalmars.com> wrote:

 Denton Cockburn wrote:
 On Thu, 06 Dec 2007 12:35:41 -0800, Walter Bright wrote:

 Andrei has announced on his web site http://erdani.org/ that he's
 working on the book "The D Programming Language" due out in October  
 of
 1998.

forward the new things in D 2.0? These two books will be really good for D. Now the D-volution begins. (That still makes sense, you're remaking C++ properly)

The idea is that the book will represent D 2.0.

won't be new compatibility-breaking changes in the language?

I hope it isn't. I like the fact that D is constantly evolving. Certainly, there's a bit of feature creep here & there, but overall it gives the feeling that D is certainly bridging the gap between programming paradigms and presenting itself as a modern language.

I don't want to start a new wave of this holy war. It is need to clarify my question: there are good examples of new versions of languages which do not require redesigning already written programs: evolution of Java, evolution of C#, evolution of Ruby (prior to 1.9), evolution of Python (prior to 3.0) and so on. These aren't 100% source code compatible, but switching to a new version requires only relative small changes in existing programs (C# 3.0 is very good example of adding some of new ground-breaking features in the language). So my question means: would D 2.0 be in the state when new language modifications won't require redesigning old programs? Unlike to the situation with const in D 2.0 which requires careful addition of const in D 1.0-based programs. -- Regards, Yauheni Akhotnikau
Dec 07 2007
prev sibling parent reply Walter Bright <newshound1 digitalmars.com> writes:
Robert Fraser wrote:
 I hope it isn't.
 
 I like the fact that D is constantly evolving. Certainly, there's a bit 
 of feature creep here & there, but overall it gives the feeling that D 
 is certainly bridging the gap between programming paradigms and 
 presenting itself as a modern language.

We'll just start on D 3.0 then.
Dec 07 2007
parent reply "Craig Black" <cblack ara.com> writes:
"Walter Bright" <newshound1 digitalmars.com> wrote in message 
news:fjb1ii$1jsv$2 digitalmars.com...
 Robert Fraser wrote:
 I hope it isn't.

 I like the fact that D is constantly evolving. Certainly, there's a bit 
 of feature creep here & there, but overall it gives the feeling that D is 
 certainly bridging the gap between programming paradigms and presenting 
 itself as a modern language.

We'll just start on D 3.0 then.

I would hope that when D 2.0 features have been completed, that some time and effort will be expended toward stability and back-end optimization. Personally, I would prefer an high-quality 2.0 to a 3.0. Besides, given the scope of D 2.0, I can't quite fathom what features you would include in a D 3.0. -Craig
Dec 07 2007
parent reply Walter Bright <newshound1 digitalmars.com> writes:
Craig Black wrote:
 Besides, given the 
 scope of D 2.0, I can't quite fathom what features you would include in a D 
 3.0.

It's far too early to make plans, but I expect 3.0 would be a push to support functional programming and other things for multicore programming.
Dec 07 2007
next sibling parent Charles D Hixson <charleshixsn earthlink.net> writes:
Walter Bright wrote:
 Craig Black wrote:
 Besides, given the scope of D 2.0, I can't quite fathom what features 
 you would include in a D 3.0.

It's far too early to make plans, but I expect 3.0 would be a push to support functional programming and other things for multicore programming.

library (not form building, but the kind of thing form building libraries are built from)? Most things I can think of, except run-time interpretation (ala Python or Smalltalk), seem to be library improvements. I suppose that a better C++ interface could be invoked here, but I see that as a part of 2.x.
Dec 07 2007
prev sibling parent reply "Craig Black" <craigblack2 cox.net> writes:
"Walter Bright" <newshound1 digitalmars.com> wrote in message 
news:fjc8ls$7lq$1 digitalmars.com...
 Craig Black wrote:
 Besides, given the scope of D 2.0, I can't quite fathom what features you 
 would include in a D 3.0.

It's far too early to make plans, but I expect 3.0 would be a push to support functional programming and other things for multicore programming.

I was under the impression that transactional memory would be included in 2.0.
Dec 07 2007
next sibling parent Walter Bright <newshound1 digitalmars.com> writes:
Craig Black wrote:
 I was under the impression that transactional memory would be included 
 in 2.0.

Too soon to tell.
Dec 07 2007
prev sibling parent Robert Fraser <fraserofthenight gmail.com> writes:
David Wilson wrote:
 Plus, that area still seems to be seeing rapid evolution. It'd be
 pretty terrible if we ended up with some syntax in 2.0 for an
 experimental feature that could end up being the "const debate" of
 3.0, simply by jumping the gun before the technology has stabilized
 enough to be generally useful.

IMO, the syntax Bartoz presented at the conference was fine.
Dec 09 2007
prev sibling parent Walter Bright <newshound1 digitalmars.com> writes:
eao197 wrote:
 On Fri, 07 Dec 2007 04:48:40 +0300, Walter Bright 
 The idea is that the book will represent D 2.0.

Could we expect that D 2.0 will be stable enough at Oct 2008 and there won't be new compatibility-breaking changes in the language?

Yes.
Dec 07 2007
prev sibling next sibling parent Denton Cockburn <diboss hotmail.com> writes:
On Thu, 06 Dec 2007 22:22:10 -0800, Robert Fraser wrote:

 eao197 wrote:
 On Fri, 07 Dec 2007 04:48:40 +0300, Walter Bright
 <newshound1 digitalmars.com> wrote:
 
 Denton Cockburn wrote:
 On Thu, 06 Dec 2007 12:35:41 -0800, Walter Bright wrote:

 Andrei has announced on his web site http://erdani.org/ that he's
 working on the book "The D Programming Language" due out in October
 of 1998.

forward the new things in D 2.0? These two books will be really good for D. Now the D-volution begins. (That still makes sense, you're remaking C++ properly)

The idea is that the book will represent D 2.0.

Could we expect that D 2.0 will be stable enough at Oct 2008 and there won't be new compatibility-breaking changes in the language?

I like the fact that D is constantly evolving. Certainly, there's a bit of feature creep here & there, but overall it gives the feeling that D is certainly bridging the gap between programming paradigms and presenting itself as a modern language.

While true and agreeable, we do need a point at which D should be stable enough to have another official release (2.0). Then the new development branch can be 3.0 Thinking about it though, it is kinda weird to have 2.0 come out after having worked with 2.00(1-8).
Dec 07 2007
prev sibling parent "David Wilson" <dw botanicus.net> writes:
On 12/8/07, Craig Black <craigblack2 cox.net> wrote:
 "Walter Bright" <newshound1 digitalmars.com> wrote in message
 news:fjc8ls$7lq$1 digitalmars.com...
 Craig Black wrote:
 Besides, given the scope of D 2.0, I can't quite fathom what features you
 would include in a D 3.0.

It's far too early to make plans, but I expect 3.0 would be a push to support functional programming and other things for multicore programming.

I was under the impression that transactional memory would be included in 2.0.

It seems to me, D being a pragmatic language targeting realistic environments, STM wouldn't be a win with the number of cores most machines have these days (right?). Plus, that area still seems to be seeing rapid evolution. It'd be pretty terrible if we ended up with some syntax in 2.0 for an experimental feature that could end up being the "const debate" of 3.0, simply by jumping the gun before the technology has stabilized enough to be generally useful.

Dec 09 2007