Nick Sabalausky Wrote: > Yea, the other thing he said about it that really raised my eyebrow was that > "an array carries around no bounds information". Where the hell did he get > that?
This one threw me for a bit. What he is saying is that D tried to improve on the "an array carries no bounds information" by including bounds for arrays. He thinks it is better to wrap it in the class/struct to handle it. As he said he likes C/C++ and just wants the syntax cleaned up, not additions to the language... I don't agree... He misses the point that then everyone must provide a proper wrapper around their array operations. > And the whole "all of the functions that work with [strings] are just > sitting around in the global namespace"...Uhh...what global namespace? As I implied he wants all operations bundled up in a String class. But yeah, there isn't a global namespace.
