www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D.announce - D Language Foundation Monthly Meeting Summary (September 24, 2021)

reply Mike Parker <aldacron gmail.com> writes:
Attendees:

Andrei Alexandrescu
Walter Bright
Iain Buclaw
Ali Çehreli
Max Haughton
Martin Kinkelin
Mathias Lang
Razvan Nitu
Mike Parker

(Átila Neves was on vacation in an area with limited internet 
access)

The primary item on the agenda for this meeting was a governance 
proposal from Mathias Lang. Modeled on [Python's PEP 
13](https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0013/), the proposal was 
to establish a self-governing Core Team (CT) of unlimited size, 
and a five-member Steering Committee (SC) elected annually by the 
CT. The CT would take on all management and decision-making 
responsibilities, subject to veto by the SC. The proposal set out 
a basic set of procedures and responsibilities for each team, 
including the establishment of Working Groups within the core 
team to focus on specific areas (i.e., compiler development, dub, 
DIPs, etc.).

We spent the majority of the meeting discussing the pros and cons 
of such a structure. Among the points discussed, a major pro and 
a major con stand out: formalizing governance can potentially 
bring more order and structure to the day-to-day management of 
the language and the ecosystem (pro); there's a risk of Walter 
and  being pushed out of the decision making process (con).

In the end, we agreed that some sort of formalized committee that 
brings more order to the ecosystem is worth pursuing, but that 
decisions regarding development of the language should be left in 
the hands of Walter and Átila.

Given that membership in the monthly meetings has expanded over 
time, and the quarterly meetings include industry reps using D in 
production, we already have a skeleton of the Core Team outlined 
in Mathias's proposal. Mathias agreed to go back to the drawing 
board and draft a new proposal that is smaller in scope and 
better suited to the size of our community. The goal is to take 
what we already have and formalize a process for organizing work 
on priority tasks, managing resources, drafting volunteers, etc., 
(in other words, a team that can manage the ecosystem), while 
leaving language design decisions to Walter and Átila.

I will assist Mathias in drawing up the proposal and we will 
present it at a future foundation meeting (I anticipate November).

A topic that came up in course of the discussion was pull 
requests blocking on feedback from Walter or Átila. As a remedy, 
Razvan will be sending periodic updates to them with a list of 
PRs that require their feedback. Walter is also open to once- or 
twice-month-meetings with contributors to resolve pull-requests 
through in-person discussion.

We agreed to establish a page on dlang.org that lists the core 
team members so there's no doubt who is involved in the 
management process.

Walter would like to establish a new slogan, or tagline, for D. 
He asked us all to think about this for a future meeting. (Ali 
has since solicited some good advice from a relative who is a 
professional marketer that has gotten us on the right track.)

Our next meeting will take place on October 22nd at 13:00 UTC. 
This will be a quarterly meeting, so the industry reps will be 
present.

As always, if anyone has anything they'd like me to put on the 
meeting agenda, please let me know beforehand. I don't know for 
sure if we'll be able to fit anything onto this month's meeting, 
though. These meetings can run long if the industry reps have 
anything big to discuss, and we're going to have a major item on 
the foundation's agenda that I expect will consume most of 
post-industry portion of the meeting (`-preview=in`). But if you 
have something, I'll see what I can do.
Oct 01
next sibling parent reply Konstantin <kostya.hm2 gmail.com> writes:
On Friday, 1 October 2021 at 12:32:20 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
 Attendees:

 Andrei Alexandrescu
 Walter Bright
 Iain Buclaw
 Ali Çehreli
 Max Haughton
 Martin Kinkelin
 Mathias Lang
 Razvan Nitu
 Mike Parker

 [...]
Offtopic: Are there any plans to publish the roadmap for the language and stdlib development on wiki or elsewhere?
Oct 01
parent reply max haughton <maxhaton gmail.com> writes:
On Friday, 1 October 2021 at 21:48:23 UTC, Konstantin wrote:
 On Friday, 1 October 2021 at 12:32:20 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
 Attendees:

 Andrei Alexandrescu
 Walter Bright
 Iain Buclaw
 Ali Çehreli
 Max Haughton
 Martin Kinkelin
 Mathias Lang
 Razvan Nitu
 Mike Parker

 [...]
Offtopic: Are there any plans to publish the roadmap for the language and stdlib development on wiki or elsewhere?
Mike is editing it at the moment. It will probably go into the foundation Ddoc sources (Not a huge of the wiki since it's not tracked in git)
Oct 01
parent reply Konstantin <kostya.hm2 gmail.com> writes:
On Friday, 1 October 2021 at 23:53:46 UTC, max haughton wrote:
 On Friday, 1 October 2021 at 21:48:23 UTC, Konstantin wrote:
 On Friday, 1 October 2021 at 12:32:20 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
 Attendees:

 Andrei Alexandrescu
 Walter Bright
 Iain Buclaw
 Ali Çehreli
 Max Haughton
 Martin Kinkelin
 Mathias Lang
 Razvan Nitu
 Mike Parker

 [...]
Offtopic: Are there any plans to publish the roadmap for the language and stdlib development on wiki or elsewhere?
Mike is editing it at the moment. It will probably go into the foundation Ddoc sources (Not a huge of the wiki since it's not tracked in git)
Thank you, Max! Do I understand correctly, that roadmap section will be available at https://dlang.org/foundation/index.html
Oct 02
parent max haughton <maxhaton gmail.com> writes:
On Saturday, 2 October 2021 at 08:48:10 UTC, Konstantin wrote:
 On Friday, 1 October 2021 at 23:53:46 UTC, max haughton wrote:
 On Friday, 1 October 2021 at 21:48:23 UTC, Konstantin wrote:
 On Friday, 1 October 2021 at 12:32:20 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
 Attendees:

 Andrei Alexandrescu
 Walter Bright
 Iain Buclaw
 Ali Çehreli
 Max Haughton
 Martin Kinkelin
 Mathias Lang
 Razvan Nitu
 Mike Parker

 [...]
Offtopic: Are there any plans to publish the roadmap for the language and stdlib development on wiki or elsewhere?
Mike is editing it at the moment. It will probably go into the foundation Ddoc sources (Not a huge of the wiki since it's not tracked in git)
Thank you, Max! Do I understand correctly, that roadmap section will be available at https://dlang.org/foundation/index.html
Most likely, but we will get it on the home page as well so it can't be missed.
Oct 02
prev sibling next sibling parent Alexey <invalid email.address> writes:
On Friday, 1 October 2021 at 12:32:20 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
 new slogan
feature X ? D got it yesterday!
Oct 01
prev sibling next sibling parent Imperatorn <johan_forsberg_86 hotmail.com> writes:
On Friday, 1 October 2021 at 12:32:20 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
 Attendees:

 Andrei Alexandrescu
 Walter Bright
 Iain Buclaw
 Ali Çehreli
 Max Haughton
 Martin Kinkelin
 Mathias Lang
 Razvan Nitu
 Mike Parker

 [...]
This is great. Been waiting for this to happen. And yes, we need a new slogan 😅
Oct 02
prev sibling next sibling parent reply James Blachly <james.blachly gmail.com> writes:
On 10/1/21 8:32 AM, Mike Parker wrote:
 Walter would like to establish a new slogan, or tagline, for D. He asked 
 us all to think about this for a future meeting. (Ali has since 
 solicited some good advice from a relative who is a professional 
 marketer that has gotten us on the right track.)
1. "Move fast" Pros: More succinct than "Write fast code, fast" or whatever the old slogan was. Still captures the essence of both speed of execution and ease of writing. Potential tie-in to D-Rocket logo. Cons: Potential association with silicon valley phrase "move fast and break things". 2. "Future code" Pros: Association with the idea that we are often at the leading edge of new features which are later incorporated into other languages. May also carry the implication that D is great language for the reader to learn in the future. Potential tie-in to space and mars theme. Cons: Could be open to criticism that garbage collected language is not "the future," but this would likely be a tiny number of detractors.
 ...
 As always, if anyone has anything they'd like me to put on the meeting 
 agenda, please let me know beforehand. I don't know for sure if we'll be 
 able to fit anything onto this month's meeting, though. These meetings 
 can run long if the industry reps have anything big to discuss, and 
 we're going to have a major item on the foundation's agenda that I 
 expect will consume most of post-industry portion of the meeting 
 (`-preview=in`). But if you have something, I'll see what I can do.
Thanks for doing these writeups as community liaison.
Oct 03
next sibling parent bauss <jj_1337 live.dk> writes:
On Sunday, 3 October 2021 at 21:24:31 UTC, James Blachly wrote:
 Cons: Could be open to criticism that garbage collected 
 language is not "the future," but this would likely be a tiny 
 number of detractors.
It seems like D itself is moving away from GC everywhere too.
Oct 04
prev sibling parent =?UTF-8?Q?Ali_=c3=87ehreli?= <acehreli yahoo.com> writes:
On 10/3/21 2:24 PM, James Blachly wrote:

 Cons: Potential association with silicon valley phrase "move fast and
 break things".
I am going off-topic but I feel I have to make a correction there. As a person who worked and lived in Silicon Valley since 1996 (since 1994 in the greater Bay Area), I can safely claim that that phrase has never been a Silicon Valley phrase. It was used by Facebook in their less enlightened days (a business that may arguably be associated with Silicon Valley by their postal address). Ali
Oct 05
prev sibling next sibling parent Imperatorn <johan_forsberg_86 hotmail.com> writes:
On Friday, 1 October 2021 at 12:32:20 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
 Attendees:

 Andrei Alexandrescu
 Walter Bright
 Iain Buclaw
 Ali Çehreli
 Max Haughton
 Martin Kinkelin
 Mathias Lang
 Razvan Nitu
 Mike Parker

 [...]
I don't have a slogan in mind. But it would be nice if it could capture the plasticity of the language somehow
Oct 03
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Ki Rill <rill.ki yahoo.com> writes:
On Friday, 1 October 2021 at 12:32:20 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
 [...]
These are great news! As for the new slogan, I believe we need to put some emphasis on D's modelling power. If I come up with something decent, I'll post it. Meanwhile: (1) Reliable, fast. (2) Safe, not strict. (3) Smooth start, deploy. (1) - "no" unexpected surprises, improved memory safety, easy to catch bugs such as trying to index a pointer in a safe function, out-of-bounds array write/read and similar; an almost instantaneous compilation, performance similar to that of C/C++. (2) - continuing from (1), it's safe, but you make the final choice how far you want to go. (3) - it's "relatively" easy to start a new project in D using DUB: `dub init/add/run`. Need a library that's not available in DUB? Create a D interface to C header file and use it. There are tools that can automate this process, etc. I put "..." because it's not always the case. About (1): I've written some C++ code recently. I was very happy with the code. I've read the code multiple times in search for potential bugs and errors. I decided to rewrite some of the code in D just to see the difference code-wise and performance-wise. Guess what happened? It didn't compile. I got out-of-bounds access error in D meanwhile the C++ version ran happily with no sign of any failure.
Oct 04
next sibling parent Imperatorn <johan_forsberg_86 hotmail.com> writes:
On Monday, 4 October 2021 at 15:44:11 UTC, Ki Rill wrote:
 On Friday, 1 October 2021 at 12:32:20 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
 [...]
These are great news! As for the new slogan, I believe we need to put some emphasis on D's modelling power. If I come up with something decent, I'll post it. [...]
Very curious what code that was.
Oct 04
prev sibling parent IGotD- <nise nise.com> writes:
On Monday, 4 October 2021 at 15:44:11 UTC, Ki Rill wrote:
 About (1): I've written some C++ code recently. I was very 
 happy with the code. I've read the code multiple times in 
 search for potential bugs and errors. I decided to rewrite some 
 of the code in D just to see the difference code-wise and 
 performance-wise. Guess what happened? It didn't compile. I got 
 out-of-bounds access error in D meanwhile the C++ version ran 
 happily with no sign of any failure.
That's a classic with C++ and static arrays. C++ now has the STL array which is standard now but who cares because not many know about it and there so many ways to do the same things in C++ you get lost. Also, it's ugly. In the case for D, I think D is a "sky is the limit" kind of language. D handles so many different areas, from low level to rather high level quite nicely. However, this together with one of the best metaprogramming out there, the versatility of the language is really among the highest. Now, the metaprogramming in C++ is just as powerful but not many people can handle it and they tend to avoid more complicated solutions. With D, metaprogramming is much more approachable and tasks that the programmer was unable to do in C++ can be done in D relatively easy.
Oct 04
prev sibling parent WebFreak001 <d.forum webfreak.org> writes:
On Friday, 1 October 2021 at 12:32:20 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
 [...]
 new slogan
 [...]
want to generate controversial heat? Do it in D (DIID) (careful with there being a trademark for DiiD though)
Oct 05