On Sat, 22 Oct 2011 02:28:28 +0300, bearophile <bearophileh...@lycos.com>
wrote:
so:
IMO people are spoiled by dynamic languages
We should aim to something *better* than dynamic languages, where
possible. If you have to do certain things (even "slow" ones), there's
no point in making them harder than necessary in D.
Python is a good language, but it's not perfect, and in a new language
I'd like something even better. D contains several small things that are
better than Python (an many things that are worse than Python).
Bye,
bearophile
With spoiled i didn't mean those languages do it better in general
(expressiveness, maybe), what i meant is that they just work, without any
effort from the programmer.
It may be all right for them and you could say it is what every language
should do but in reality this is not the case for D like languages.
Not with the expense of efficiency on a low level task.
We could aim all we like but we can't beat dynamic languages that easily,
if you don't care reaching or beating C (on every aspect, system access,
performance...) you don't have much of a limit do you? :)
