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."
Thread beginning with comment 324045
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
Member since:2005-10-30
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
Member since:
2005-09-17
I've been watching D for a few years now, as a replacement for the ageing C is much needed.
But D's move towards ever more features and complexity means that the original niche of a simple C replacement is no longer filled. And D-lite seems like a good name for a language ;-)
As an example, consider this D code:
foo(bar())
Question: if this line of code is executed, will the function bar() be called?
Answer: it depends on the definition of foo! (see http://www.digitalmars.com/d/2.0/lazy-evaluation.html).
But if someone took just the most useful bits of D (exceptions, no pre-processor, classes, bounds checking) and made a language out of that, I'm such it would convince a lot of C programmers to switch.