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.

Reply via email to