Linked by Amjith Ramanujam on Tue 22nd Jul 2008 01:54 UTC
Walter Bright talks about D and his desire to improve on systems programming languages. Many successful concepts from other languages like JavaScript, PERL, Ruby, Lisp, Ada, Erlang, Python, etc., have had a significant influence on D, he says. He adds: "D 1.0 was pretty straightforward stuff, being features that were adapted from well-trod experience in other languages. D 2.0 has ventured into unexplored territory that doesn't have a track record in other languages. Since these capabilities are unproven, they generate some healthy skepticism. Only time will tell."
Permalink for comment 324188
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:
2005-07-06
the problem with D is serious feature creep. They keep bolting shit onto the 2.0 spec and its never ending. They never realised a fully 100% spec 1.0 working D compiler to start with before jumping into 2.0 territory.
GDC is serious fail, its not comptabiel with the DM version.
The Tango vs Phobos is also utter fail. Walter cant see why he needs to jettison the garbage that is phobos.
D 2.0 is going down the C++ road. Adding so much complexity and junk.
As long as all the effort is poured into the closed Digital Mars release, few people are going to be interested, GDC will always be playing catchup.