On Mon, 1 Aug 2011, Peter Alexander wrote: > On 1/08/11 7:29 PM, Kagamin wrote: > > Walter Bright Wrote: > > > > > Now on reddit! > > > > > > http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/j48tf/how_is_c_better_than_d/ > > > > C++ has a better thought out type system. > > Nice joke. > > http://blog.llvm.org/2011/05/c-at-google-here-be-dragons.html > > Please read my note at the end. I believe D (probably) has a better type > system. It just wasn't very well though out. > > I believe many aspects of D's type system were added in without fully > exploring the ramifications they had on other parts of the language. There are > at least two pieces of evidence which support my belief: > > 1. The fact that you can't copy const struct objects containing reference > types. > > 2. The fact that the root object still isn't const correct. > > > C++ has some questionable choices for its type system, but it generally > doesn't prevent you from getting work done.
You're mixing state of implementation with design of the type system. Easy enough to conflate, but still a conflation of issues. Don't get me wrong, that there's QOI issues still is a real problem. I'd also agree that it's in the top 10 list of real problems. I don't know that I'd make it #1 on the list, though. Please don't ask me what my #1 issue is, it varies from week to week. :) Until the QOI issues are worked out, or at least reduced significantly, it's not clear that we'll be able to make any strong statements about the quality of the design. Later, Brad
