On Saturday, 17 June 2017 at 04:32:41 UTC, Liam McGillivray wrote:
On Wednesday, 14 June 2017 at 12:08:16 UTC, Mike wrote:
> THINGS TO DROP
--------------
* C++ interoperabiliy
Walter's right: memory safety is going to kill C and C++ will
go with it. Don't waste time on this; it's not going to
matter in 10 or 20 years.
Thank you for making a list to give people an idea of what D3
could be, but I definitely don't support less interoperability
with C++. I want D3 to have a better argument to transition
from C++ than D2 has. With all the C++ API's out there, making
D incompatible would be a ginormous deal-breaker for a
ridiculous number of projects. D3 should seek to be worth the
transition from C++.
Seems like there is a split right down the middle. The problem is
of course that going down the middle is neither satisfactory nor
innovative.
I agree with you, but I think the C++ compatibility is a lost
game and increasingly so without aligning the core semantics. C++
is changing too...
