Rainer Deyke: > However, I'm not sure what advantage a built-in type would provide over a > library type.<
Some C++ libs show that you can implement some of the optimizations I was talking about (present in Fortran compilers, that juggle, split, merge and slice nested for loops in various ways, in a cache-aware way too) with a library type too. But I guess it's not easy to do. > Better GC is always nice, but I'd rather see the language stabilize > before worrying about such implementation details. I have real small Java programs that run 6+ times slower once translated to D. And I have benchmarks that run 12+ times slower, all thanks to the GC. There are many Java programmers around, if one of them comes to D, writes some code and sees the program run 5 times slower than the same program running on Java I think you may have lost a potential new D programmer. So I agree the GC it's less important than other things, but it's not a small detail. mixins: I skip this because I am too much ignorant on the topic. I'll learn a bit more Scala. Bye, bearophile
