On Sunday, 14 October 2012 at 03:24:16 UTC, torhu wrote:
In my view, D2/Phobos2 is still playing catch-up to D1/Tango.
The D1 compiler is less buggy, Tango is still better than
Phobos2, library could well be better.
I wouldn't recommend anyone to start a new project in D1. But
I also feel that some people are jumping the gun when they talk
about D2's maturity.
I'll agree; I haven't used much of Tango myself but I can
remember where some of the problems were. I had trouble trying to
get a good enough foot-hold on the library while Phobos is
generally simpler.
I wish D2 was more mature, several things seem to crop up.
Duplicate functions with only const/mutable differences in some
cases, the $ not fully implemented, phobos still evolving; Things
like this can be worked around to a degree. I can't help but wish
it was already perfect.
However; D2 IS mature enough for a good number of tasks, and
even the hickups I'm finding they are far easier (and more
pleasant) to work around (comparing to C++, syntax and how ugly
it is alone, not to mention how confusing the STL is). Also D2
where there's common/potential for mistakes and ambiguities it
errs and tells you (add parentheses, or no assignment in an if
statement, or a statement does nothing) rather than adding extra
rules to handle dozens of potential cases that gets more
confusing with each iteration.
Plus getting a hang of Templates is a breeze once I got a good
foothold on it all. I'm no expert with templates, but problems
are easy to find quickly and resolve with template bugs.
