3 ms·
D is pretty much the opposite of Go, a pinnacle of feature bloat instead of stripped down simplicity. A C++ killer that turned into a kind of C++ with GC.
by LessDmesg 7y ago
D is pretty much the opposite of Go, a pinnacle of feature bloat instead of stripped down simplicity. A C++ killer that turned into a kind of C++ with GC.
- pjmlp 7y agoGo would be have an interesting language in 1986 [0], or in 1995 [1]. As it stands, it is forced to follow some of Java design mistakes by not integrating modern features and then being forced to actually adopt them in a half-baked way due to market pressure, while striving not to break backwards compatibility with existing code. Modern C++ also uses GC, even it is opt-in. And several modern C++ features actually originated in D. D has the benefit of not being constrained by C copy-paste compatibility like C++. But yeah, it suffers from having a tiny community. [0] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oberon_(programming_language) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oberon_(programming_language) [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limbo_(programming_language) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Limbo_(programming_language)
- hu3 7y ago> But yeah, it suffers from having a tiny community. And feature bloat.
- pjmlp 7y agoBeing a modern language not stuck in the 60's language design is not feature bloat.
- hu3 7y agoOrthogonal concepts. Modern languages can be bloated.
- pjmlp 7y agoOr stuck in the pre-history of language design. If Go's design was perfect, its eco-system wouldn't feel like Java 1.0, full with libraries to replicate what should be language features to start with. The first time I saw "go generate" it was on Borland C++ 2.0 for MS-DOS, released around 1990.
- hu3 7y agoCan't lie. It's entertaining to watch people like you get emotional over a piece of technology.