dukc

4 ms·

1.
by dukc 4y ago
Author here, ask me anything about it!
2.
by dukc 4y ago
Author here, ask away!
3.
by dukc 4y ago
An optimiser may not treat null-dereferencing D code as undefined behaviour. It must either error at compile time (if it can prove the dereference would be null no matter what), crash at runtime, or derefer the null address, which also resu
4.
by dukc 4y ago
Used the wrong word. Meant "archaic", not "anarchic". Side note, D has source code tools, this being probably the most famous one: https://github.com/dlang-community/D-Scanner . It's just that
5.
by dukc 4y ago
Nope. Memory safety means no undefined behaviour. Crashing is defined behaviour. Indeed, at least in the D philosophy it is better to crash than to just do something and continue when a bug is detected. If that were not the case, assertions
6.
by dukc 4y ago
Yes, that is correct. There are all kinds of gc-less containers implemented for D, including the standard library std.container.array that is much like C++ std::vector. The downside of those is that they are not entirely memory safe. EDIT:
7.
by dukc 4y ago
I wrote it. Where's the problem precisely? I don't see it.
8.
by dukc 4y ago
D is pretty safe choice in that regard. It has been around 20 years already and still marches on. Also it has many companies using it that depend on it. So while there is no guarantee it will ever be among top-10 languages, it's unlike
9.
by dukc 4y ago
I'm personally kind of anarchic, because I use hardly any tools. Text editor and terminal, that's how I program. The compiler is my linter. So I don't know.
10.
by dukc 4y ago
The short answer is, I really don't know. There are lots of speculation about that around. The only confident opinion I have is that good does not mean popular and vice-versa. But since you asked, I think I should make my guess. I thin
11.
by dukc 4y ago
Author here. Fire questions away!