3 ms·
If you can stomach a GC enabled by default, a D is a good attempt at sane C++. The syntax is instantly familiar for a C++ programmer, and the templates are very
by skocznymroczny 6y ago
If you can stomach a GC enabled by default, a D is a good attempt at sane C++. The syntax is instantly familiar for a C++ programmer, and the templates are very similar to C++ (although saner).
- simias 6y agoI really feel like D is in a tough spot these days. In the early 2000 I remember being interested in it but I dismissed it because of the licensing issues that existed back then. Now it's sorted out but I think it crippled the language early on and now it's sandwiched between other "managed" languages with far better adoption and better support on one side (Java/JVM languages, C#, Go) and low level system language with better adoption and no GC on the other (C++/Rust in particular). While I personally find D interesting and vastly better designed than some of the competition (cough go cough) it's very hard for me to imagine it getting big in the mainstream without some massive industry backing.
- skocznymroczny 6y agoRust hasn't had a much bigger adoption until a while ago. It had a better open source presence perhaps, but not necessarily adoption. It changed now obviously. I guess the question is, does it really need to be mainstream to be usable? As long as it works for the usecases you need it for, popularity isn't a necessary factor. I have to say though that D has some issues that prevent it's wider adoption, both historical and current. Some are obvious, such as unnecessary two standard libraries conflict (I missed out on it, but the OOP person in me would have preferred Tango over Phobos).