On Mon, Jul 14, 2014 at 11:22:53PM +0000, John Carter via Digitalmars-d wrote: [...] > Any other good blog posts / social media comments / pointers I can > digest and use?
This one came to mind: http://bartoszmilewski.com/2013/09/19/edward-chands/ > The hard fact is it wouldn't be so urgent to move to D if C/C++ didn't > hurt so much. I feel your pain. :) I was programming C/C++ for decades... starting with C, then C++, then back to C (after being horribly, horribly scarred by C++), then settled somewhere in the middle (basically using C++ as "C with classes", rather than the oft-touted advanced C++ style, which seemed to me like investing your life in a tower of cards ready to crumble at the slightest provocation). All the while, I was longing for something better. Java didn't appeal to me for various reasons (its verbosity, which is intolerable without an IDE -- and I hate IDEs; its shoving OO idealogy down your throat even where OO clearly doesn't fit well, such as classes with only static members, for example; the ugly mess with boxed/unboxed types; difficulty of interfacing with other languages like C/C++ libraries; etc.). I was very happy to discover D. :) [...] > I might put a bit of an embedded device slant on the whole thing, > since... > > * That is part of my personal core competance. > * That is where the greatest growth in the computer industry will happen. > * That is where there is a very strong case for D replacing C/C++. Before we start selling D on embedded devices, how sure are we that D is ready to take on the task? I.e., how well does it handle low-memory devices? ARM architectures? We better have (very good) answers for these, otherwise we risk destroying D's cause by defending it poorly. T -- Trying to define yourself is like trying to bite your own teeth. -- Alan Watts