On 10/29/2014 7:49 AM, Russel Winder via Digitalmars-d wrote:
On Tue, 2014-10-28 at 21:37 -0700, Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d
wrote:
2. Namesapces not widely used
Really? Maybe I habg out with better than average C++ programmers ;-)
I wouldn't be in the least surprised if there was a fair amount of selection
bias in who you choose to hang out with!
Note that dmd itself doesn't use namespaces (hangs head in shame). I guess I'm
not good enough to hang out with you :-(
8. Exceptions not widely used
Exceptions are embraced in D, perhaps even excessively :-)
To be fair, exceptions in C++ have termination semantics and so should
be very rarely used. Your comment implies D exceptions are more like
Java exceptions, for handling errors.
I don't see anything that prevents C++ exceptions to be used for handling
recoverable errors.
9. For many projects two or more ways used to represent a string class
D's strings are built-in to the language, which is a huge win for consistency.
Even modern C++ suffers from two distinct string types.
And there was me thinking std::string was standard in C++ ;-)
"hello" is not an std::string. There are also quite a few leftover string
classes in C++ from the olden daze, and people still cannot resist the urge to
roll their own.
