On Wednesday, 7 October 2015 at 13:15:38 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad
wrote:
On Wednesday, 7 October 2015 at 10:18:16 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
If you want to know what D is in details, see dlang.org for
language spec.
No, that is backwards. :-) The language spec is the product.
What is needed is a definition of what the problem area is
(e.g. use cases).
problem area -> design -> language spec
Where do you think is a limit to applicability of a
turing-complete language?
Semantic significance is that classes are polymorphic and
hence reference types, structs are value types.
Not real difference regarding pointers.
Pointers are of little use for a type that is always reference
type.
- Get rid of all gc-dependent language features.
@nogc
No, remove them from the language and replace them with library
friendly constructs.
Make them not compile? @nogc does exactly that.
Reducing GC usage and emscripten backend are actionable if you
want to work on them.
