5 ms·
The only way you can be saying this is if you haven't experienced metaprogramming in D. C++ does not compare at all. Generics do not compare at all. You can ta
by schveiguy 5y ago
The only way you can be saying this is if you haven't experienced metaprogramming in D. C++ does not compare at all. Generics do not compare at all.
You can take D metaprogramming from my cold dead hands.
- leetrout 5y agoIf you were in the authors shoes and you disliked C++ templates would you also have written off Go without trying it, though? No argument on going from D to something else but to not know either and not even try Go is what surprises me.
- GoblinSlayer 5y agoI was puzzled by strange linguistic ideas of go's designers. The reference to the English language can't justify go's syntax.
- leetrout 5y agoDo you have an example top of mind?
- GoblinSlayer 5y agoArray of bytes []byte being English, but byte array byte[] being not English.
- he_the_great 5y agoYeah I do much in C# and almost never use generics. And when I do it is almost always not what I want. D has me fooled and I can't imagine Go choosing to go further in D's direction over C#. I feel sorry for them.
- travv0 5y agoYou almost never use List<T>? Dictionary<TKey, TValue>? IEnumerable<T>?
- he_the_great 5y agoThose don't matter, because while you can't build your own in Go, the built in types provide the same functionality.