On Monday, 15 October 2012 at 16:37:08 UTC, Peter Alexander wrote:
...
- Simple(r) templates
I keep seeing things like this and probably i am failing to
understand it.
This is a vast understatement for D templates. Yes, easier to
use, i agree.
But C++ templates are stone age comparing to D and i don't see
this mentioned enough where it matters most. It was there in
recent reddit discussions too. I am reading those comments (some
posters obviously have some kind of agenda) and seeing no one
refuting them. They neither know C++ well enough to do
metaprogramming nor D. Because if they did know, they would never
bring templates into any discussions which involves C++/D
comparison.
Comparing to C++.
* D templates easier to use.
* There are constructs you can't just do templates without.
(templates without "static if" is c without "if")
* Some things possible (string/float/alias/... arguments) because
there is no C++ way of doing these.
* Some things possible in practice (there are things you can
achieve with C++ templates but they are practically impossible)
* You can have all these and able get higher performance.
There are probably more of those i just can't remember now.
