On Thu, 26 Mar 2009 16:33:09 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu
<seewebsiteforem...@erdani.org> wrote:
Don wrote:
Cristian Vlasceanu wrote:
Hm... how should I put it nicely... wait, I guess I can't: if you guys
think D is a systems language, you are smelling your own farts!
Because 1) GC magic and deterministic system level behavior are not
exactly good friends, and 2) YOU DO NOT HAVE A SYSTEMS PROBLEM TO
SOLVE. C was invented to write an OS in a portable fashion. Now that's
a systems language. Unless you are designing the next uber OS, D is a
solution in search of a problem, ergo not a systems language (sorry
Walter). It is a great application language though, and if people
really need custom allocation schemes, then they can write that part
in C/C++ or even assembler (and I guess you can provide a custom
run-time too, if you really DO HAVE a systems problem to address --
like developing for an embedded platform).
You're equating "systems language" with "language intended for writing
a complete operating system". That's not what's intended.
AFAIK there are no operating systems written solely in C++.
Probably, D being a "systems language" actually means "D is competing
with C++".
I'm surprised at how many people misunderstand the "systems language" or
"systems-level programming" terms. Only a couple of months ago, a good
friend whom I thought would know a lot better, mentioned that he thought
a "systems-level language" is one that can be used to build large
systems.
wikipedia to the rescue!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/System_programming_language
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/System_software
-Steve
