Hi, this is usually not a problem, because in many scenarios people are more than happy to mix languages.
I for one, am language agnostic, because I always use the appropriate language for the project at hand, and don't have any problem mixing languages. In the Telecom industry which I know quite well, C and C++ are slowly being relagated to places where they are the only viable option, usually due to hardware constraints. In some pieces of equipment C++ is already too big to fit in. But when there is an option, the implementation language tends to be a higher level language (Java, .Net, Erlang), specially due to the available tooling. I think that is a mistake to expect "a language to rule them all" scenario. -- Paulo "dennis luehring" <dl.so...@gmx.net> wrote in message news:i9h5s4$10p...@digitalmars.com... > Am 18.10.2010 10:34, schrieb dennis luehring: >>> My question is how many D like languages came up with an open source >>> compiler? Why do people keep using that argument again and again? >> >> and second >> >> how many of these "other" languages got an community driven development >> processes (aren't there always "these five keyplayers" around?) > > another point is that most of todays dynamic languages are based more or > less on the java vm or .net (with some exceptions) > > but this won't help in an "static" like lanquage like D because > it adresses also near to system programming that is in these worlds only > "fakeable" -> what should i do with the inline-asm inside of an java/.net > vm, how to fake ptr-arithmetic-stuff for c-linkage parties > these are often forgotten backend problems
