Bill Baxter wrote:
On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 4:37 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu
<seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org> wrote:
Leandro Lucarella wrote:
Walter Bright, el 1 de diciembre a las 13:45 me escribiste:
Leandro Lucarella wrote:
I develop twice as fast in Python than in D. Of course this is only me,
but that's where I think Python is better than D :)
If that is not just because you know the Python system far better
than the D one, then yes indeed it is a win.
And because you have less noise (and much more and better libraries
I guess :) in Python, less complexity to care about.
And don't get me wrong, I love D, because it's a very expressive language
and when you need speed, you need static typing and all the low-level
support. They are all necessary evil. All I'm saying is, when I don't need
speed and I have to do something quickly, Python is still a far better
language than D, because of they inherent differences.
I think only not having a compile cycle (no matter how fast compiling
is)
is a *huge* win. Having an interactive console (with embedded
documentation) is another big win.
That makes sense.
I guess D can greatly benefit from a compiler that can compile and run
a multiple-files program with one command (AFAIK rdmd only support one
file programs, right?) and an interactive console that can get the ddoc
documentation on the fly. But that's not very related to the language
itself, I guess it's doable, the trickiest part is the interactive
console, I guess...
I'm amazed that virtually nobody uses rdmd. I can hardly fathom how I
managed to make-do without it.
The web page[1] says it doesn't work on Windows. That'd be my excuse
for not using it.
[1] http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/rdmd.html
--bb
rdmd does work for Windows. What it does is to detect and cache
dependencies such that you only need to specify your main file.
Andrei
