On Saturday, 27 September 2014 at 12:12:08 UTC, ketmar via D.gnu
wrote:
On Sat, 27 Sep 2014 11:47:33 +0000
"Ledd via D.gnu" <d.gnu@puremagic.com> wrote:
I don't think that the gcc team is slow on releasing new
releases and patches
they are much slower than D team.
I think that on one hand it's true that D is currently a
rapidly-changing language, but this also prevents a gain in
popularity, no one wants to adopt a non-standard language that
is constantly mutating for production code.
at least three companies already adopted D: Facebook,
Sociomantic
and... sorry, i forgot the third. so your "no one" is a slight
exaggeration. ;-)
My assumption is that D needs to freeze at some point .
ahem... we already have C++. ;-) it's not frozen, but it's
legacy turned
it to abomination.
i believe that shipping old D in distributives will harm D more
than
not shipping at all. people will write new code using obsolete
features, fight with already-fixed bugs, and so on. being
independent of
GCC allow to avoid such problems, 'cause maintainer can build
new
package when new GDC is out. but if GDC will be the part of
GCC, no
updates will ship until new GCC is out, 'cause GDC release
cycle will be
dependent of GCC release cycle.
i once dreamt about GDC as part of GCC, but i changed my mind.
3 companies is a good start, but let me outline the fact that not
all the companies have the amount of people that Facebook has,
many many dev teams are composed of 3-4 people and there are an
indefinite amount of freelancer, I don't think that Facebook is a
good unit of comparison given this facts .
Also Facebook finds the resources and the time to build its own
version of PHP, I think that it's safe to say that they can even
afford to experiment with this kind of technologies .
My point being that for the majority of people, the ones that
work on open source projects, large projects, productions for the
masses, a stable language and a predictable release cycle, is
more valuable then a cutting-edge feature-reach language .
