4 ms·

There is some irony in someone replying to the author of the D language suggesting that maybe the D language is the real solution he's looking for.

I_am_uncreative 9mo ago
A tale as old as time.
publicdebates 9mo ago
It might be the language he is looking for, but it might not, and more likely than not is not. D is one of those odd languages which most likely ought to have gotten a lot more popular than it did, but for one reason or another, never quite caught on. Perhaps one reason is because it lacks a sense of eccentricity and novelty that other languages in its weight class have. Or perhaps it's just too unfamiliar in all the wrong ways. Whatever the case may be, popularity is in fact one of the most useful metrics when ruling out a potential language for a new project. And if D does not meet GP's requirements in terms of longevity or commercial support, I would certainly not suggest GP adopt it too eagerly, simply because it happens to check off most or all their technological requirements.
- RickHull 9mo ago
  I think that D meets Walter Bright's requirements.
  - BeetleB 9mo ago
    I would hope so. He invented the damn language.
    - WalterBright 9mo ago
      There's always room for improvement!
- WalterBright 9mo ago
  D is an elegant re-imagine of C and C++. For a trivial example, typedef struct S { int a; } S; becomes simply: struct S { int a; } and unlike C: extern int foo(); int bar() { return foo(); } int foo() { return 6; } you have: int bar() { return foo(); } int foo() { return 6; } For more complex things: #include <foo.h> becomes: import foo;
  - hardlianotion 9mo ago
    Everything except the import looks like standard c++ since at least 98.
    - WalterBright 9mo ago
      C++ does not allow forward references outside of structs. The point-of-instantiation and point-of-declaration rules for templates produces all kinds of subtle problems. D does not have that issue. Yes, you absolutely can get the job done with C and C++. But neither is an elegant language, and that puts a cognitive drag on writing and understanding code.
  - publicdebates 9mo ago
    Smoe of these are definitely nice-to-haves*, but when you're evaluating a C++ alternative, there are higher priority features to research first. How are the build times? What does its package system(s) look like, and how populated are they? What are all its memory management options? How does it do error handling and what does that look like in real world code? Does it have any memory safety features, and what are their devtime/comptime/runtime costs? Does it let me participate in compile time optimizations or computations? Don't get me wrong, we're on the same page about wanting to find a language that fills the C++ niche, even if it will never be as ideal as C++ in some areas (since C++ is significantly worse in other areas, so it's a fair trade off). But just like dating, I'm imagining the fights I'll have with the compiler 3 months into a full time project, not the benefits I'll get in the first 3 days. * (a) I've been using structs without typedef without issue lately, which has its own benefits such as clarifying whether the type is simple or aggregate in param lists, while auto removes the noise in function bodies. (b) Not needing forward declarations is convenient, but afaik it can't not increase compile times at least somewhat. (c) I like the consistency here, but that's merely a principle; I don't see any practical benefit.
- zxcvasd 9mo ago
  [dead]
- pests 9mo ago
  I'm sorry, is this an in-joke or satire or something? I can't tell really. Maybe a woosh moment, and as others have said, the GP/person you are speaking about, Walter Bright, is the creator of the D language. Maybe you didn't read your parent's post? Not saying its intentional, but it almost seems rude to keep speaking in that way about someone present in the conversation.
- girvo 9mo ago
  GP literally invented the D language.
WalterBright 9mo ago
> maybe the D language is the real solution he's looking for Yes, I realized that after not finding any 'droids.

I_am_uncreative 9mo ago

A tale as old as time.

publicdebates 9mo ago

It might be the language he is looking for, but it might not, and more likely than not is not. D is one of those odd languages which most likely ought to have gotten a lot more popular than it did, but for one reason or another, never quite caught on. Perhaps one reason is because it lacks a sense of eccentricity and novelty that other languages in its weight class have. Or perhaps it's just too unfamiliar in all the wrong ways. Whatever the case may be, popularity is in fact one of the most useful metrics when ruling out a potential language for a new project. And if D does not meet GP's requirements in terms of longevity or commercial support, I would certainly not suggest GP adopt it too eagerly, simply because it happens to check off most or all their technological requirements.

RickHull 9mo ago
I think that D meets Walter Bright's requirements.
- BeetleB 9mo ago
  I would hope so. He invented the damn language.
  - WalterBright 9mo ago
    There's always room for improvement!
WalterBright 9mo ago
D is an elegant re-imagine of C and C++. For a trivial example, typedef struct S { int a; } S; becomes simply: struct S { int a; } and unlike C: extern int foo(); int bar() { return foo(); } int foo() { return 6; } you have: int bar() { return foo(); } int foo() { return 6; } For more complex things: #include <foo.h> becomes: import foo;
- hardlianotion 9mo ago
  Everything except the import looks like standard c++ since at least 98.
  - WalterBright 9mo ago
    C++ does not allow forward references outside of structs. The point-of-instantiation and point-of-declaration rules for templates produces all kinds of subtle problems. D does not have that issue. Yes, you absolutely can get the job done with C and C++. But neither is an elegant language, and that puts a cognitive drag on writing and understanding code.
- publicdebates 9mo ago
  Smoe of these are definitely nice-to-haves*, but when you're evaluating a C++ alternative, there are higher priority features to research first. How are the build times? What does its package system(s) look like, and how populated are they? What are all its memory management options? How does it do error handling and what does that look like in real world code? Does it have any memory safety features, and what are their devtime/comptime/runtime costs? Does it let me participate in compile time optimizations or computations? Don't get me wrong, we're on the same page about wanting to find a language that fills the C++ niche, even if it will never be as ideal as C++ in some areas (since C++ is significantly worse in other areas, so it's a fair trade off). But just like dating, I'm imagining the fights I'll have with the compiler 3 months into a full time project, not the benefits I'll get in the first 3 days. * (a) I've been using structs without typedef without issue lately, which has its own benefits such as clarifying whether the type is simple or aggregate in param lists, while auto removes the noise in function bodies. (b) Not needing forward declarations is convenient, but afaik it can't not increase compile times at least somewhat. (c) I like the consistency here, but that's merely a principle; I don't see any practical benefit.
zxcvasd 9mo ago
[dead]
pests 9mo ago
I'm sorry, is this an in-joke or satire or something? I can't tell really. Maybe a woosh moment, and as others have said, the GP/person you are speaking about, Walter Bright, is the creator of the D language. Maybe you didn't read your parent's post? Not saying its intentional, but it almost seems rude to keep speaking in that way about someone present in the conversation.
girvo 9mo ago
GP literally invented the D language.

WalterBright 9mo ago

> maybe the D language is the real solution he's looking for Yes, I realized that after not finding any 'droids.