How an Engineering Company Chose to Migrate to D

Post by scj » Wed, Jun 20, 2018, 4:57 PM UTC

philjohn wrote: post #32

Xophmeister wrote: post #7

While the article states that other languages were evaluated, it seems as though the project was motivated entirely by the author and the evaluation was just paying lip service to what was basically a foregone conclusion. Don't get me wrong, I like D from the small amount of playing I've done with it -- and maybe it is the best tool for their purposes -- but this doesn't strike me as an impartial evaluation. The need…

The biggest problem is they have engineers who have turned their hands to programming, one would expect, without the formal training and so have latched onto various antipatterns without knowing any better because Pascal allowed them to get away with it - painting themselves into a corner. He mentioned an awful lot of code that would have to be refactored, and it could be that they are just too far down the rabbit ho…

Post by setr » Wed, Jun 20, 2018, 4:58 PM UTC

closeparen wrote: post #46

Xophmeister wrote: post #7

While the article states that other languages were evaluated, it seems as though the project was motivated entirely by the author and the evaluation was just paying lip service to what was basically a foregone conclusion. Don't get me wrong, I like D from the small amount of playing I've done with it -- and maybe it is the best tool for their purposes -- but this doesn't strike me as an impartial evaluation. The need…

Framing closures as a “requirement” is pretty strange. Depending on the context they can be an ergonomic nice-to-have, but it’s not like you can’t express a program without them.

Post by noir_lord » Wed, Jun 20, 2018, 5:02 PM UTC

philjohn wrote: post #32

Xophmeister wrote: post #7

While the article states that other languages were evaluated, it seems as though the project was motivated entirely by the author and the evaluation was just paying lip service to what was basically a foregone conclusion. Don't get me wrong, I like D from the small amount of playing I've done with it -- and maybe it is the best tool for their purposes -- but this doesn't strike me as an impartial evaluation. The need…

The biggest problem is they have engineers who have turned their hands to programming, one would expect, without the formal training and so have latched onto various antipatterns without knowing any better because Pascal allowed them to get away with it - painting themselves into a corner. He mentioned an awful lot of code that would have to be refactored, and it could be that they are just too far down the rabbit ho…

Post by blub » Wed, Jun 20, 2018, 5:03 PM UTC

oblio wrote: post #21

detaro wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Developers can learn new languages though if a company lets them. (Edited to be less glib. bad habit)

A friend (C# dev) just refused a job from a company in the Netherlands, for a D dev position. I don't know if it's the same company. It's not that they're not capable, but some will not want to risk several years of their career to learn it.

Post by batbomb » Wed, Jun 20, 2018, 5:04 PM UTC

ssdd wrote: post #50

Volt wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>While the article states that other languages were evaluated, it seems as though the project was motivated entirely by the author and the evaluation was just paying lip service to what was basically a foregone conclusion. Now you understand how all of these "How we chose this language" writeups work.

Yeah, almost all the time its the inclination of an individual towards a new language that becomes the driving factor of migration rather than the actual shortcoming of current language.