For another real world example, we had a server daemon written in Java
and it took forever, had huge problems, cost us quite a bit, etc. etc.
We decided to have the same server rewritten in D, and it took
significantly less time, works correctly according to spec, doesn't
crash/hang half as often (the Java server would die in a way that made
it appear to still be up, made us crazy), and more.
Sure, maybe this is a reflection of the programmer who worked on it -
but in the end, D was by far the better route for us.
-[Unknown]
bearophile wrote:
Walter Bright:
D aims to reduce project costs by reducing training time and shortening
development time.<
I agree that this is very important. Helping the programmer avoid bugs and
helping her to follow good design practices are among the most important
qualities of a programming language, because in practical programming often
most time (= money) is spent debugging programs and updating them.
But you are comparing D with C++, because programming in D1 is faster and often
simpler than doing the same in C++.
But today most people use languages like Java, Python, C#, that often shorten
developing time even more than D1.
D1 is almost a system language, so it's not easy to compete with the
productivity of application languages designed to put the programmer first and
the CPU second.
And D2 is not an easy&simple language, you need a good amount of time to
learn/teach it, more than Java for example.
Bye,
bearophile
