On Thursday, 8 September 2016 at 10:20:42 UTC, Russel Winder
wrote:
On Wed, 2016-09-07 at 20:29 +0000, deXtoRious via
Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
[…]
More to the general point of the discussion, I find that most
scientifically minded users of Python already appreciate some
of the inherent advantages of lower level statically typed
languages and often rather write C/C++ code than descend into
the likes of Cython. D has considerable advantages over C++ in
conciseness and template facilities for achieving zero cost
static polymorphism without descending into utter
unreadability. Personally, I find myself still forced to write
most of my non-Julia high performance code in C++ due to the
available libraries and GPGPU support (especially CUDA), but
in terms of language properties I'd much rather be writing D.
Or Chapel.
It's very early days for Chapel at the moment, but I don't really
see it as being remotely comparable to D or even Julia, it's much
closer to a DSL than a general purpose language. That's by no
means a bad thing, it seems like it could be a very useful tool
in a few years, but it's never going to completely substitute for
the likes of Python, C++ or D even for purely scientific
programming. I'm also a bit concerned about how limited the
compile time facilities seem there at the moment, but I guess
we'll just have to wait and see how it develops over the next
couple of years.
