"Jonathan M Davis" <jmdavisp...@gmx.com> wrote in message news:mailman.2923.1316247041.14074.digitalmar...@puremagic.com... > On Saturday, September 17, 2011 02:26:12 Xavier wrote: >> "Jonathan M Davis" <jmdavisp...@gmx.com> wrote in message >> news:mailman.2921.1316239886.14074.digitalmar...@puremagic.com... >> >> > I definitely prefer D to C++, but I honestly think that your hatred >> > of >> > C++ >> > (which you have expressed on several occasions) clouds your >> > judgement >> > on the >> > matter. Many, many programmers are fine with C++, and while many >> > programmers >> > may like C++ to be improved or would like a language that's similar >> > to >> > C++ but >> > without as many warts, that doesn't mean that they're going to be in >> > a >> > hurry >> > to try out D. And many, many of the people who have problems with >> > C++ >> > use >> > languages such as C# and Java instead and are fine with that. D has >> > a >> > major >> > uphill battle to truly become as relevant as any of those languages >> > are >> > regardless of how much better it may be. >> >> There is something wrong with that last sentence. Especially since in >> the >> preceding material that I snipped, you noted that the compilers for D >> are >> not up to snuff. You seem to be noting its deficiencies but wanting it >> to >> be "better" somehow, maybe for some of it's "neat features"? Perhaps D >> just has to grow up before it can battle anywhere, let alone on hills? > > The language itself is superior.
A family of languages goes from "crappy" to "superior" in one generation? Umm, I don't think so, "fan boy". ;) > It's the implementation which has issues, > though those have been being resolved at a fairly fast pace of late. It's not just that, though I believe that you think that.
