On Friday, 14 January 2022 at 02:13:48 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
compiler). You can write functional-style code, and, thanks to
metaprogramming, you can even use more obscure paradigms like
declarative programming.
No, you can't. You can do a little bit of weak declarative
programming in C++ thanks to SFINAE. The D type system does not
provide a capable solver.
I can theoretically do everything in C++ that I do in D, for
example,
Only with the GC, and even then that claim is a stretch. Without
the GC you loose features that C++ has.
In C++, I'm guaranteed that there is no GC -- even when having
a GC might actually help me achieve what I want. In order to
You have access to several GCs in the C++ eco system.
that are not compatible with the GC, etc.. Definitely NOT worth
the effort for one-off shell script replacements. It takes 10x
Never seen a scripting problem that cannot be handled well with
Python, why would I not use Python for scripting?
When you sacrifice system level programming aspect in order to
make scripting more convenient, then you loose focus. And people
who primarily want to do system level programming will not
respond well to it.
Hardly surprising.
With D, I can work at the high level and solve my problem long
before I even finish writing the same code in C++.
This is great, but does not solve the other issues.
And when I need to dig under the hood, D doesn't stop me --
it's perfectly fine with malloc/free and other such
alternatives.
Nobody are fine with malloc/free. Even in C++ that is considered
bad form.
This is why these fanboy-discussions never go anywhere. People
make up arguments and pretend that they are reality.
Well, it isn't.
Rust and C++ are doing better than D in terms of adoption, and it
isn't just marketing. It is related to actual design
considerations and a willingness to adapt to the usage scenario.
Rust has actually focused on runtime-free builds. They pay
attention to demand. Despite Rust being "high level" and
"normative" they pay attention to system level usage scenarios
beyond those of browsers. I think this is why it is easier to
belive in the future of Rust than many other alternatives. And I
don't have a preference for Rust, at all.
