3 ms·
I'm sorry, but shouldn't we critique Dlang itself instead of the constant comparisons with Rust? Dlang has had significant work poured into it, and the project
by spookie 4y ago
I'm sorry, but shouldn't we critique Dlang itself instead of the constant comparisons with Rust?
Dlang has had significant work poured into it, and the project has delivered a quality language with safety in mind. I don't mean to be defensive, but these threads always seem to ask the same question, it's boring at this point.
- vlovich123 4y agoI think it's fair game to discuss Rust in this context since there's a major effort underway to support writing in-kernel drivers in Rust. Unless you think the kernel will be a bazaar of languages, then it's useful to think about which language is the most likely to "win".
- pjmlp 4y agoThere are other OSes out there where D could eventually make a mark. Naturally the whole issue is that there is no big movement regarding writing OSes in D for that to matter anyway. Better luck using TinyGo, Java, .NET or Oberon in bare metal workloads (where runtime plays the OS role), as there are a couple of products for them, than D.
- spookie 4y agoI think it would be of value, to a degree, if the kernel supported multiple languages. As some languages are better suited for some tasks. This implies comparing them, so I understand your point now.