3 ms·

It could be cool if Google had just pushed D instead of creating Go...

by swah 13y ago

bsaul 13y ago
I told myself a similar thing : why did they create a new language instead of picking that one ? But then i saw the list of features that D has, and remembered the reason why Rob Pike said he wanted to stop using C++ when he saw the new C++ version : "so they thought C++ needs MORE ?".
- qznc 13y ago
  Yes, D is not a small and simple language. The goal as stated at DConf was to be "comprehensive". D shall include the right tool for any job in system programming. That necessary includes that the programmer has lots of options. You can use threads or fibers. You can meta-program with various degrees of freedom (and danger) up to generating arbitrary code strings during compilation. You can use high-level parallelism tools like parallel map and thread pools. You can explicitly use SIMD operation for instruction level parallelism. You can have a garbage collector or you can disable it. On the other hand, D fixes a few problems of C++ (which mostly come from C source code compatability) like ambiguous syntax for templates (Is ">>" a shift-right token or two closing "parens"?).
  - gtani 13y ago
    In the back of Stroustrup 4th ed, there's a list of at least a couple dozen things Stroustrup considers problems arising from C back compatibility, but I don't have the book with me
  - WalterBright 13y ago
    C++'s template syntax is not a result of C source code compatibility.
    - qznc 13y ago
      So why did they not pick something better like foo!(a,b) instead of foo<a,b>? Because parsing was not as well understood as it is today?
he_the_great 13y ago
As bsaul hints at, isn't Google, it is the people behind Go. Google didn't say, let us make a new language. Instead employees ask management if they could work on a language. Given this perspective it is easy to see why supporting D wasn't chosen. Even so, D is making good progress and has a good community to keep it alive for a long time to come.

It could be cool if Google had just pushed D instead of creating Go...

by swah 13y ago

It could be cool if Google had just pushed D instead of creating Go...

bsaul 13y ago

I told myself a similar thing : why did they create a new language instead of picking that one ? But then i saw the list of features that D has, and remembered the reason why Rob Pike said he wanted to stop using C++ when he saw the new C++ version : "so they thought C++ needs MORE ?".

qznc 13y ago
Yes, D is not a small and simple language. The goal as stated at DConf was to be "comprehensive". D shall include the right tool for any job in system programming. That necessary includes that the programmer has lots of options. You can use threads or fibers. You can meta-program with various degrees of freedom (and danger) up to generating arbitrary code strings during compilation. You can use high-level parallelism tools like parallel map and thread pools. You can explicitly use SIMD operation for instruction level parallelism. You can have a garbage collector or you can disable it. On the other hand, D fixes a few problems of C++ (which mostly come from C source code compatability) like ambiguous syntax for templates (Is ">>" a shift-right token or two closing "parens"?).
- gtani 13y ago
  In the back of Stroustrup 4th ed, there's a list of at least a couple dozen things Stroustrup considers problems arising from C back compatibility, but I don't have the book with me
- WalterBright 13y ago
  C++'s template syntax is not a result of C source code compatibility.
  - qznc 13y ago
    So why did they not pick something better like foo!(a,b) instead of foo<a,b>? Because parsing was not as well understood as it is today?

he_the_great 13y ago

As bsaul hints at, isn't Google, it is the people behind Go. Google didn't say, let us make a new language. Instead employees ask management if they could work on a language. Given this perspective it is easy to see why supporting D wasn't chosen. Even so, D is making good progress and has a good community to keep it alive for a long time to come.