On Thursday, 30 July 2015 at 09:45:31 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
On 07/30/2015 09:39 AM, "Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQi?=
<[email protected]>" wrote:
On Thursday, 30 July 2015 at 04:20:41 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
type exists in the latter system. D does not have a design
that is as
principled as that of the systems you draw inspiration from.
...
Don't garble quotes like that. Thanks.
No garbling. I quote as little as possible per Usenet convention.
[…on principled design and consistency…]
Well, D fails here.
I think D is at a decent position, and I don't judge a language
based on its libraries, so Phobos itself is inconsequential.
When DMD shifts to D it might become an interesting starting
point for experimentation as I think a compiler is a task for
which the current D language is well suited.
Note that I don't have an agenda here. I'm not going to use any
library primitive for this that uses more than 3 characters
anyway and I am not teaching D to anyone.
Ok, so let's drop it. I am merely supporting the OP's viewpoint
that "sequence" is the less suitable name…
