At Wed, 1 Sep 2004 20:15:54 +1000, Erik de Castro Lopo wrote: > > On Tue, 31 Aug 2004 13:15:24 -0400 > Pete Bessman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > The D programming language looks very promising in this regard, but > > its newsgroup faces a daily battle with people who seem more > > interested in creating a religion than a tool. > > I had a bit of a look at D and I was majorly underwhelmed. This > is a direct descendant of C, C++ and Java. It extends this lineage > a little, but completely ignores ideas from languages such as Perl, > Python, Ruby and the whole constellation of functional languges.
That's actually precisely what I like about it. D is, depending on your vantage point, a modernized C, a cleaned up C++, or a non-retarded Java (sorry, I can't think of a more diplomatic way to say that). That's all it's supposed to be. There isn't exactly a dearth of more experimental languages out there, I like seeing a real grizzled and pragmatic language like D pop up. --Pete <http://www.gazuga.net> "Nothing great was ever achieved by being realistic!" --Tom Venuto