Atila laid it out pretty clear: he doesn't care about the
differences, he wants the work to be done. And I'm with him on
that. Go and it's standard library may be way simpler, but it
get's the job done (which is trivial in both cases, by the way)
almost instantaneously, which is a much bigger deal than it seems
to be. When your edit-compile cycle is that fast, it changes the
way you write code, you develop a habit of writing smaller pieces
of code and testing them more frequently. Remember that Linus
Torvalds' talk about Git at Google?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4XpnKHJAok8&t=3025
H. S. Teoh is not the only one here cringing at "fast code fast"
on the main page. I use D from time to time for over 10 years
now, and even used it at work and it was a relatively positive
experience, thanks to vibe.d. But compilation times are just
horrible - minimum 3 seconds for a 1500 lines project (on a
8-core 4GHz CPU with 16 GB RAM), and that's after I ditched
std.regex, made all imports qualified (didn't help that much,
though) and switched to ld.gold. And I would be ok with slow
compilation if DMD was smart enough, doing some graph magic, like
extensive control flow analysis, and insane optimizations, but it
doesn't. For example, Rust compilation times are no picnic
either, but it's obvious why - you get nice good-looking error
messages, tons of useful warnings and very fast programs free of
memory corruption bugs. It's not the case with DMD, though. The
language may be better than C++, but it's fastest compiler is
slower and produces worse code? I'd rather not boast about speed
at the main page in this situation. And god save us from ridicule
by Goers.
