Linked by Thom Holwerda on Wed 28th Mar 2012 19:22 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 512204
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Why haven't they gone with D?
by moondevil on Fri 30th Mar 2012 15:29
in reply to "RE: Why haven't they gone with D?"
What's D's concurrency model like? Because goroutines and channels are wonderfully easy to use.
D offers the actors model, along with the usual concurrency models offered by all mainstream operating systems.
Another goal of Go is speed of compilation. D probably doesn't compete very well (but that's just a suspicion based on the sizes of the two languages.)
Any language with modules as similar compilation speeds.
D is generally more complicated than Go wants to be. Essentially, D is a better C++ but Go is a better C.
A better C but lacking:
- enums
- generic programming
- metaprogramming
- exception handling
- FFI with C or C++ libraries requires the use of a C compiler on the host system
- No direct support for system programming
If it wasn't for Google's backing, Go would just be another attempt to replace C.
RE[3]: Why haven't they gone with D?
by satsujinka on Fri 30th Mar 2012 18:29
in reply to "RE[2]: Why haven't they gone with D?"





Member since:
2010-03-11
What's D's concurrency model like? Because goroutines and channels are wonderfully easy to use.
Another goal of Go is speed of compilation. D probably doesn't compete very well (but that's just a suspicion based on the sizes of the two languages.)
D is generally more complicated than Go wants to be. Essentially, D is a better C++ but Go is a better C.