On Friday, 24 April 2015 at 20:50:17 UTC, bachmeier wrote:
along with a Makefile, and my coauthors and I are using D. None
of the things you claim as design flaws are a problem for us.
Sounds like your usage fall into the category "compiled scripting
language", but there you have many alternatives. So, you may use
D for such, but I'd question if that is a rational direction.
For system programming a solid unmanaged memory model, strong
typing, verification and near optimal performance matters. The
requirements are much more demanding.
As always, when it comes to programming languages, it really
depends on what you're trying to do. Not that long ago someone
around here was claiming Python is a niche language like
Haskell.
Which is wrong.
Python and Haskell are opposites. Python is a versatile general
dynamic imperative _scripting_ language, suitable for connecting
components top-down. Haskell is a statically typed functional
programming language where you design bottom-up. Haskell has a
small following (but big within FP). Python has a wide following,
extensively documented, to the level where it is difficult to
find a question unanswered when using Google.
On Reddit, garbage collection is often called a design
flaw. YMMV applies more to programming languages than about
anything else.
C++ would have been dead if the memory model was based on a Boehm
GC. Many people have tried and left D due to compiler quality and
GC. If those two issues had been given the highest priority (over
new features) D would have taken a larger market share a long
time ago.
(And no Tango/Phobos was not a big deal, just a minor annoyance.)
