On Mon, 07 Oct 2013 21:47:13 +0200 "Dicebot" <pub...@dicebot.lv> wrote:
> On Monday, 7 October 2013 at 19:34:11 UTC, Craig Dillabaugh wrote: > > while I got a chuckle out of "D is what C++ wanted to be.", I > > might omit this. Insulting C++ isn't likely a great way to > > attract the C++ crowd, which is one of our major target > > audiences. > > Quite the contrary, I can't really imagine many good C++ > developers who don't insult this language on their own :) Its > problems are quite well-known and widely accepted. > Yea. And it's not as if it's worded like "D is the programming salvation that the steaming turd C++ only wishes in its pathetic dreams it could be." *THAT* is what "insulting" means. But no, it's just simply "D is what C++ wanted to be": It's a very accurate, meaningful, succinct summary that gets across the gist of D. D really *is*, very much, a redesigned C++. There's no shame in that, and there's nothing wrong with stating that reality. And sure, there may be *more* to D than that, but it's just a one-sentence *summary* - it doesn't need to be 100%. It only needs to paint a rough picture. And the sentence does a great job of that. In any case, comparisons are perfectly valid and *not* equivalent to tossing insults, so let's not be flower children about this.