On Wednesday, 29 June 2016 at 17:00:49 UTC, Guido wrote:
I have all this business generally working in C++. I just
wanted to try D for a production level quick project. So, the
language is not ready. I'm really sad about this. I had hoped
that I could get some useful work done. C++ is painfully slow
to write & debug, but what can you do.
As I said, why exchange one set of bad design decisions for
another?
On another topic, tuples seem to have a major problem as well.
Tuple!(float, float, float) test;
Tuple!(float, float, float) [] array_data;
test[0] = 1.0; // works
array_data[i][0] = 1.0; // doesn't work. Compile-time error,
probably because the language itself doesn't have a dedicated
extension for tuple elements that is distinguished from array
dereferencing. This is the logical extension of how to access
tuples. I normally use structs in C++, but since pointer
arithmetic is really frowned upon in D, I decided to use
Tuples. A mistake, I supposed.
So, I've spent a huge amount of time getting ready to write in
D. That's all wasted. I'll check back in another 10 years to
see if your hobby language is still around. In the mean time,
try to think about improving the compiler error messages. I can
write code any way the language demands, but it has to make
sense and I can't be doing a research project on the language
every 10 minutes to figure out the right incantation. I already
have that with C++.
Bye
Fun fact: the following does work as expected.
Tuple!(float, float, float) test;
Tuple!(float, float, float) [] array_data = new Tuple!(float,
float, float) [3];
test[0] = 1.0;
array_data[2][0] = 1.0;
So... if something does not work, please, have at least the
maturity to post the actual code that does not work. Posting code
that works and then complaining with your tone doesn't make you
look very professional.
But I guess I'm just loosing my time.
Bye.
