Mon, 14 Sep 2009 07:33:59 -0400, bearophile thusly wrote: > But lot of people will judge D against more modern languages like C#, > Scala or Java) and not against C.
Programmers often belong to three kinds of groups. First come the fans of traditionally weakly typed compiled languages (basic, c, c++). They have tried some "dynamic" or "academic" languages but did not like them. They fancy efficiency and close to metal feel. They think compilation to native code is the best way to produce programs, and think types should reflect the feature set of their cpu. They believe the syntax C uses was defined by their God. The second group started with interpreted languages built by amateurs (php, ruby, python, some game scripting language etc). They do not understand the meaning the types or compilation. They prefer writing short programs that usually seem to work. They hate formal specifications and proofs about program properties. They are usually writing simple web applications or some basic shareware utilies no one uses. They also hate trailing semicolons. The members of the last group have studied computer science and languages, in particular. They have found a pet academic language, typically a pure one, but paradigms may differ. In fact this is the group which uses something other than the hybrid object-oriented/procedural model. They appreciate a strong, orthogonal core language that scales cleanly. They are not scared of esoteric non-C-like syntax. They use languages that are not ready to take a step to the "real world" during the 70 next years. So yes, every group has a bit different expectations.. >>C++ isn't anymore complex than D2,< > > I don't agree, see below. It would help all of you if you could somehow formally specify how you measure language complexity. Is it the length of the grammar definition or something else? Otherwise these are just subjective opinions.
