On Fri, 2017-12-22 at 13:38 +0000, Dan Partelly via Digitalmars-d wrote: > […] > > I wanted to look at D as a "beter C++", with simple and sane > metaprograming and metaligusitic features. It is almost there, > but unfortunately, not 0 cost abstraction without loosing too > much. You depend too much of having garbage collection active. It > works as a "betterC" it seems, but you loose a lot of > functionality which should be in a "better C" and again, a lot > from the standard libraries is lost. Template C++ 2017 works well > for a better C as well, and I retain 0 cost abstraction, decent > (yet inferior to D meta-programming), closures, > exceptions, scopes... […]
I think we are now in a world where Rust is the zero cost abstraction language to replace C and C++, except for those who are determined to stay with C++ and evolve it. D, like Go, should glory in having a GC and just go with it. Of course this does not mean the GC as is is good enough. Go is on its third I believe, and Java on it's fifth. -- Russel. =========================================== Dr Russel Winder t: +44 20 7585 2200 41 Buckmaster Road m: +44 7770 465 077 London SW11 1EN, UK w: www.russel.org.uk
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
