On Friday, 28 November 2014 at 12:06:06 UTC, Chris wrote:
On Tuesday, 25 November 2014 at 13:24:04 UTC, ketmar via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
On Mon, 24 Nov 2014 17:10:25 -0800
Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d-announce
<digitalmars-d-announce@puremagic.com> wrote:

I know it's a tough call. But I do see these sorts of comments regularly, and it is a fact that there are too many D libraries gone to seed that won't compile anymore, and that makes us look bad.
but D wins in overall. being one of the architects in my bussiness i was eagerly pushing D as our main development language. it's good that this thing (and some other too) happens before i succeeded. now we keep going with C++, as it fscks safety too, fscks principle of least astonishment, almost never fixes inconsistencies, but it has alot more libraries and i can hire alot more programmers with it. i'm still using D as a language for my hobbyst throw-away projects though, and D is great for such things. D wins, 'cause i *almost* stopped ranting (not only in this NG) and just accepting it as is. well, almost as is, i'm applying alot of patches over vanilla D. this, of course, makes my code incompatible with every other D compiler out here, but luckily this is
not a concern anymore.

"just accepting it as is" - Well, there's no need to do that. If there are issues, you're free to comment on them, make a feature request and/or fix them yourself. Everybody accepts any language "as is" as long as it's a mainstream language, regardless of any shortcomings or major annoyances. Your comment proves just that.

Just this week I was working on new software and I'm still amazed at how many options I have in D (and I keep discovering new options). D is always compared to C++ in terms of performance and libraries. Sure, there are more libraries (and by extension programmers) out there for C++. Performance might be better or worse, depending on the library and the programmer. However, The sheer abundance of options and modeling power in D is one of the reasons I stick with D. I deal with problems concerning language processing (grammar, rules etc.), i.e. mapping the human mind to a machine, and D always gives me a way to model complex and intricate systems. Sometimes I look at the code and think "How would I have implemented this in C, Python or Java?" I shudder and say "No way!" Believe it or not, modeling power, often overlooked, is one of the key features of programming languages of the future. Performance can always be improved. But modeling power is hard to add, if you don't have it already. Libraries, well, if you have strong modeling power, you can roll your own very quickly. Maybe an abundance of libraries is a sign that a language lacks modeling power.

About the article, it proves two things. First, you can easily roll your own in D. Second, you have to know the language well to be able to get the most out of it without having to roll your own.[1] Either way, it improves your general understanding of programming.

[1] This includes not hesitating to ask question on D.learn.

Reply via email to