On Saturday, 16 July 2016 at 11:02:00 UTC, thedeemon wrote:
On Thursday, 14 July 2016 at 10:58:47 UTC, Istvan Dobos wrote:
I was thinking, okay, so D's GC seems to turned out not that
great. But how about the idea of transplanting Rust's
ownership system instead of trying to make the GC better?
This requires drastically changing 99% of the language and it's
bringing not just the benefits but also all the pain coming
with this ownership system. Productivity goes down, learning
curve goes up. And it will be a very different language in the
end, so you might want to just use Rust instead of trying to
make D another Rust.
Yes that's the case for Rust, but no one has proven yet that an
ownership system needs to such a pain.
In fact someone recently proposed an idea for a readable
ownership system:
http://forum.dlang.org/post/ensdiijttlpcwuhdf...@forum.dlang.org
and I believe that it's quite possible to improve over Rust and
still having a productive language. In fact the simple `scope`
statements are a first and excellent step on this journey ;-)
