Apart from this, what are the real advantages of D over Rust? They seem to be similar languages in what they want to achieve. Rust seems to be younger and the syntax seems to be slightly different from the C-like syntax. I am not such concerned or interested with the syntax advantages of a language over the other, but more about in general what one does better than the other. Overall, which one has a better design and a more promising future? Which one is more performant, in which situations? If you could answer all these questions it would be nice. I'm still deciding which one to learn and invest my time on, but I would like to have also your more experienced and expert opinion.
I have loved C++ when I first started learning it a pair of years
ago (then I stopped for some time for some work reasons), and
quite recently I have discovered D, which seems apparently a
better language from the design point of view, especially in
supporting OO design and modularisation, maybe I am just wrong
since I know just a little of D so far, but I really had some
problems just in setting up a simple OO project, i.e. importing
classes, there are .h and .cpp files, etc, which only make
everything confusing and make you learn stupid things instead of
being productive. D also seems to have a cleaner syntax in
general. C++ is becoming more and more a mess because they keep
introducing new functionalities to make C++ compete with new
languages, and I'm starting hating it. Languages should not just
be powerful but simple enough to be productive.
- D vs Rust nbro via Digitalmars-d
- Re: D vs Rust jmh530 via Digitalmars-d
- Re: D vs Rust cym13 via Digitalmars-d
- Re: D vs Rust lobo via Digitalmars-d
- Re: D vs Rust Ola Foaheim Grøstad via Digitalmars-d
- Re: D vs Rust tsbockman via Digitalmars-d
- Re: D vs Rust Ola Fosheim Grøstad via Digitalmars-d
- Re: D vs Rust tsbockman via Digitalmars-d
- Re: D vs Rust Brad Anderson via Digitalmars-d
- Re: D vs Rust Sönke Ludwig via Digitalmars-d
- Re: D vs Rust Ola Fosheim Grøstad via Digitalmars-d