On 11/03/2012 08:19 AM, Paulo Pinto wrote:
On Friday, 2 November 2012 at 23:08:00 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
On 11/02/2012 10:53 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
On 11/2/2012 2:33 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
I said the gap is getting thinner, not that is gone. It got foreach,
some form
of CTFE, static assert, lambda to mention a few new features.
No ranges. No purity. No immutability. No modules. No dynamic closures.
No mixins. Little CTFE. No slicing. No delegates. No shared. No template
symbolic arguments. No template string arguments. No alias this.
No static if. Limited forward references. No real function local
aggregate types. No real nested classes. No local template
instantiation. No nested functions. No value range propagation for
implicit conversions. No built-in string support. No built-in unicode
support. No template guards. No inout. No default-initialization. No
return type deduction for non-lambdas. No generic lambdas. No type
deduction for lambda parameter types. No super. Less powerful typeof
that is called decltype. No is-expressions. No compile-time
reflection. No thread-local by default. No UFCS. No tuple/sequence
types. No sequence auto-expansion. No sane built-in array types. No
tuple slicing. No .init/.min/.max/etc. No kind of static foreach. No
new scopes introduced in case statements. No block statements in a
for-loop initializer. No optional parentheses on function calls. No
implicit reference types. No ^^ operator. No binary ! operator. No
built-in complex number types. Less comparison operators. None of eg.
bearophile's enhancement requests.
... in no particular order, afaik, and to name a few. :o)
What I have learned in all my years of enterprise development is that
all those features have zero value for business.
Languages get adopted because of business value, not due to the coolness
of their feature set, how boring it may sell.
If we want to sell D to companies using C++ for years, slowly migrating
to JVM, .NET worlds, or just updating their codebases to C++11, then we
need to sell D's business value not feature lists.
Maybe you misunderstood. I am not trying to make D look good. The point
of the post was to show that C++11 and D are quite different languages.
Walter's list was rather short.
