On Saturday, 10 March 2018 at 11:07:56 UTC, psychoticRabbit wrote:
On Saturday, 10 March 2018 at 10:47:09 UTC, Dylan Graham wrote:
Yeah. Why should D worry about tying itself into C when it
can't even interface with itself through DLLs?
A reasonable point.
But.. in any case.. people work on what they are motivated to
work on.
That's really all there is to it.
That's how the open source community works.
Top down, corporate direction, simply does not apply here.
One day you (or some other D programmer) might need betterC -
who knows - and it'll be there for you - cause someone else was
motivated to do it.
Well, no. I'm more concerned with the fact that the D Language
Foundation is focused on BetterC, yet does not mention DLLs at
all.
For God's sake, if D is the future, why does it continue to leech
off C/C++? Other languages like Rust and C# only have basic
function calling C (FFI/PInvoke) yet are way more popular. I get
the feeling that most of the C++ programmers who would come to D
have already done so.
The most I'll ever need of interfacing with C and C++ is to be
able to call their functions from D. I've no reason for BetterC.
And what's with the language design, anyway? D has been designed
with features that C++ programmers don't want, then now the D
Language Foundation is wasting effort to change the language to
rope those programmers in? If D was meant to be C++ 2.0,
shouldn't it have been designed that way from the start?
I came to D from a C# background. I was looking a language that
had a GC, was awesome to program in and was very fast. Why can't
D own up to these facts, rather than becoming a leech of C++?
Every day D becomes more like C++ 2.0, why can't it just be D?
