On Tuesday, 6 December 2016 at 22:47:34 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
On Tuesday, December 06, 2016 22:13:54 bpr via
Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
On Tuesday, 6 December 2016 at 17:00:35 UTC, Jonathan M Davis
wrote:
Sure, there are folks who would prefer not to have to deal with
the GC but throw out the runtime and std lib? You lose out on
too much for it to be at all worth it for many folks. At that
point, C++11/14/17 looks far more appealing, especially as it
continues to improve.
It's a counterfactual at this point, but I would guess that if D
had left out the GC in 2010 when D2 came out it would have been
ahead of C++ in many ways and perhaps would have been able to
peel off more C++ programmers and achieve the momentum that Rust
appears to have now. Yes, it would be missing some features on
account of omitting GC, but D2 -GC in 2010 is still much better
than C++ 2011. As C++ absorbs D features, the case for D seems
weaker.
We get plenty of folks who aren't big C/C++ programmers who are
interested in D. Yes, the majority seem to have a C++
background, but we also get folks from C#, python, ruby, etc.
It would be nice to see a breakdown. From where I sit, it appears
that most of the interest in D is from C++ users, and it doesn't
appear that D popularity is rising so much. Any data that belies
that sad assessment?
