On Sat, Mar 10, 2012 at 03:34:48PM +0100, Adam D. Ruppe wrote: > On Saturday, 10 March 2012 at 06:53:49 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote: > >Really? D is a stable language as of this moment? Interesting. > > Yeah, it is. It removes restrictions or sometimes adds stuff, but over > this last year, not much of the language has actually broke. > > I have a lot of D code, some of it rather fancy, and I can't actually > think of a place where a *language* change broke it.
Well, the slated @property enforcement *will* break a lot of stuff... > Library changes break it almost every other release, but language > changes tend to be ok. There's regressions every so often, but they > aren't bad. OK. > >You mean Windows 3.1. > > You're insane! D rox my sox right off my cox and has > for a long time, and it has been getting pretty > consistently better. You're right, D *does* rock in spite of its current shortcomings. It's easy to see only the flaws when you're just focused on fixing problems, but it's true that when I take a step back and compare it with, say, C/C++, there's simply no comparison. Even with all its warts, D is unquestionably superior in pretty much every way. T -- "The number you have dialed is imaginary. Please rotate your phone 90 degrees and try again."
