On Sun, 09 Aug 2009 14:21:31 -0700, Walter Bright
<newshou...@digitalmars.com> wrote:
bearophile wrote:
2. make arrays implementable on .net
I don't care of such thing. dotnet already has C# and C# is probably
better than D, and it's similar anyway. So I don't think people will
use D on dotnet. So even if creating a D for dotnet can be positive,
I don't want D2 to change its design to allow a better implementation
on dotnet.
Even if you're correct that D.net is pointless, and I don't agree with
that assessment, I think the problems implementing D arrays on .net will
show up elsewhere in attempts to support other targets. So I think it's
a "canary" issue rather than a .net one.
But (IIRC) it's not actually a canary. .NET has slices and there's no
'self-contained' implementation problem. The issue was that the .NET
library wasn't written with slices (.NET, D or otherwise) in mind, so
conversions to/from slices were required.
