On Fri, 2015-03-13 at 00:22 -0700, Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d wrote: > On 3/12/2015 11:57 PM, Russel Winder via Digitalmars-d wrote: > > How about lining up some features for removal. > > Easier said than done. I've proposed a couple things for removal, but got a > lot > of pushback. Some things have been successfully removed:
Pushback can be ignored, and indeed should in some cases. Java is going to come to this battle when primitive types finally get removed from the language. > . octal literals C should be incinerated for the 0777 abomination. At least 0o777 can work reasonably. > . 'bit' data type > . builtin complex numbers Electronics folk love these. Many people use Python exactly for this type. > . NCEG floating point comparison > . typedef > . local operators new & delete > > > > C++, Fortran, and Java are big, complicated languages, that keep getting > > bigger and more complicated because of the obsession with backward > > compatibility. D is already a big, complicated language. If people like > > straighforward (not necessarily simple) languages, then the inference is > > quite easy. > > Has any language been successful at abandoning their user base (i.e. existing > code)? Going from D1 to D2 nearly destroyed D. I'm not eager to try that > again. The war is being played out in the Python 2/3 arena certainly. Interestingly though there are fewer and fewer Python 2 hold outs. Their holding out has made Python 3 change a little, and for the better in my view – even though I refuse to write any Python 2 specific code. -- Russel. ============================================================================= Dr Russel Winder t: +44 20 7585 2200 voip: sip:russel.win...@ekiga.net 41 Buckmaster Road m: +44 7770 465 077 xmpp: rus...@winder.org.uk London SW11 1EN, UK w: www.russel.org.uk skype: russel_winder
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part