On Thursday, 31 December 2020 at 07:07:04 UTC, RSY wrote:
On Wednesday, 30 December 2020 at 21:03:36 UTC, Paulo Pinto
wrote:
On Thursday, 24 December 2020 at 08:36:54 UTC, RSY wrote:
On Wednesday, 23 December 2020 at 19:00:14 UTC, evilrat wrote:
On Wednesday, 23 December 2020 at 18:03:56 UTC, frame wrote:
It's not the problem mentioned but I had to struggle with
DLLs and D's Variant-type. The problem is that Variant uses
TypeInfo which does not pass DLL boundaries correctly so
that int != int in runtime even it's in fact a simple int.
If you need to exchange unknown data between a DLL and your
application you need to get a workaround and cannot use
that elsewhere settled nice feature. But it's a Windows
specific issue - it works as expected on other systems.
Which is basically same as in C++, despite the fact it does
have real working SO/DLL runtime's many large projects have
their own RTTI implementation. LLVM has its own RTTI because
standard type info is "inefficient", Unreal Engine has its
own, IIRC Qt too has its own, etc...
Same thing with D Variant, some people say it is
"inefficient"... so we ended up having multiple libraries.
Not saying anything about how good or bad all this, just the
facts.
C++ you need to write duplicate code (.h and .cpp)
C++ you need to care about header include order
C++ you need to forward declare everything you gonna use if
it is not included before
C++ you need to waste time waiting for compile
Fixed with C++20 modules.
I am already playing with the experimental support on VC++.
C++ you need to fight to get proper reflection
Coming in C++23, and partially available already with a mix of
type traits and constexpr.
I am all good for D vs C++, but one needs to update their
knowledge specially when the audience is up to date with
latest ISO C++'s capabilities.
and you still have the predeclaration issue, since the whole
process is done 1 way
and this is the summary of the whole C++ has X, but it is
either half backed, or just plain bloated
you can't say c++ will have module without saying it is
implemented poorly, you still have the dirty and ugly quirks
D module system remains superior because the whole experience
is just plain superior and more sane
And you can't say C++23 will have Y therfore it is a reasonable
choice TODAY
No, it's either you have it or you don't, everyone can implement
Z, even Rust borrow checker, that doesn't make language 0
relevant when you compare solutions TODAY
And even more when you take into account that D is interopable
with both C/C++
Invalidating D, just because X Y Z will have K and have poorly
implemented N, is very unfortunate, BAD, and plain SAD, because
you just don't care about what D has to offer when you take into
account the whole feature set
