so Wrote: > > C++ is indeed complex and one of the reasons is its syntax (believe it > > or not). There was even an academic project to re-syntax C++ with the > > exact same semantics. > > Of course it's not the only cause of complexity in C++ but it is > > definitely one of the main ones. > > If that is the case, you are probably right, but still i can't quite grasp > it. > > > C++'s complexity has nothing to do with it's "power". D is as powerful > > and is less complex to use which is why we are here and not on the C++ > > dev mailing list. for example, D's classes/structs are way better than > > equivalent c++ code. > > Well if you think the complexity has nothing to do with power, how can you > use D as a counterexample? :)
"power" is a very subjective and problematic measure. We're discussing Turing complete languages and nothing prevents me from implementing a compiler/interpreter from one language to another thus gaining its "power". What we really want to talk is ease of expressiveness. C++ is more complex than D which means its harder to express oneself in c++. The difference is not that you can express something in one language but not in another (Both are Turing complete) but rather the *difficulty* of expressing the same thing in both languages. That difficulty makes for a steeper learning curve.