John Colvin:
A couple of big pluses:
1) Ease of changing code. D codebases tend to feel more
flexible than C++
Thank you - and yes, I agree.
2) Easy to transparently make use of highly optimised low-level
code in high level constructs, whether that means carefully
written D, inline asm or calling out to established C(++)
libraries.
My guess is these guys aren't going to be writing much assembler,
but everyone cares about performance at some point.
Possible pitfalls:
1) What systems are being targeted? D on obscure big-iron is a
very different prospect to D on a bunch of x86 linux servers.
I will find out more soon, but I doubt it's old IBM mainframes
(would guess linux, especially since it's largely a new project).
2) Added maintenance due to language/library changes, however
minor. Not a particularly big deal IMO, particularly when your
writing a piece of software for in-house usage.
3) Limited support options. There aren't swathes of consultants
available at any time to fix your urgent problems.
Yes - I think the support/hiring question will be something of a
factor. Let's see.
