On Thursday, 19 October 2017 at 13:09:25 UTC, Dukc wrote:
Perhaps. Well, contrasted to .Net and JVM standard libraries then?
When it comes to imperative languages I certainly think the libraries/frameworks will discourage some programming styles.
Some parts of the D standard library also assume that you follow a particular style. Nothing wrong with it. It is different to reason about programs that combine many different styles.
In some ways that has been a problem in C++. Libraries being wildly different in style. Which they now try to correct by having central guidelines and narrow down the "idiomatic" styles in the new additions to the C++ standard library…
In most regards they are very different, yes. But the similarity is that like C++/D, Forth is designed with many different programming styles in mind, instead of paving way primarily for one certain way of working.
Hm, I don't see the connection. Forth was designed to run on an 8-bit CPU, basically providing a simple memory-compact representation for controlling hardware. I think Forth encourages a rather peculiar way of programming, but maybe you are thinking about some modern dialect.
Of course D is very close philosophically to C++, that's what gave it the name in the first place! The main difference is that there's no burden of backwards compatibilty with C/C++, and as proven it's enough of difference for many.
Actually, I think D has put way too much emphasis on C compatibility. That's an area where Rust got something right by not trying to be a C superset a priori.
