Daniel Gibson wrote: > Am 15.03.2011 21:29, schrieb Jens: >> Daniel Gibson wrote: >>> Am 15.03.2011 21:07, schrieb Jens: >>>> How is it different in D where all polymorphic objects are >>>> reference types? Take have the design space away, make everything >>>> a glorified pointer and things are better? >>> >>> They obviously are. Successful languages like Java and C# do it. >>> It's less error-prone and you don't have to worry about >>> dereferencing stuff all the time (sometimes even multiple >>> dereferences at once, like in my example). >> >> More toward Java-class-language then than C++-level language. >> Sacrificing stack objects was like throwing out sharp knives from >> the kitchen. I understand. >> > > If you want value types use structs. Maybe with alias this or mixins > to "extend" them. > Or use emplace (see > http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/phobos/std_conv.html ) with classes > if you wanna play with sharp tools. > It's not like you can't (risk to) cut yourself with D, it's just > easier not to.
While the above was off-topic, I was alluding to class objects on the stack. So not to turn the thread into a critique of the entire language, I'll leave it at that.
