On Sunday, 11 January 2015 at 12:57:17 UTC, MattCoder wrote:
Since I'm relative new here, I want know from you agree with
this statement:
"
[–]clay_davis_sheeit 4 points 17 hours ago*
get real. D is more dead now than it was a year ago. if you
won't accept repo counts, look at how many people attended D
con vs Gophercon
"
"more dead" is a very subjective term.
It is "more dead" in the sense that you got @nogc and there was a
sense of movement towards getting to a workable memory model, but
since then nothing has happend. One step forward, then stagnation.
The Rust team have announced that they are moving towards a
non-breaking stability situation within 6 weeks. And they have a
working memory model.
Andrei and Walter need to stop focusing on details for a moment
and focus more on presenting "a great plan" within 2 months.
Meaning stating goals and plans which gives D a direction that
developers want and can believe in.
If no clear statements on where D is heading appears in the near
future... Well, then I am pretty sure that many of those who
prefer D will give Rust a spin when Rust hits 1.0, out of boredom.
Rust is not complete feature wise, but a working memory model and
stability is more important than having single inheritance and
other convenience features...
So D is not dead, but is currently in a position where it can be
hit by both Go and Rust. The space between Rust (system
programming) and Go (server programming) is very tiny.
