On 12/24/2017 2:11 AM, Dan Partelly wrote:
It is a game chager for D, or a least huge step forward but what is the killer
feature against a betterC done through C++ + STL ? Can anyone who really know
both D and C++ godlike say why D as betterC and not C++ as better C? Maybe
Andrei or Walter ?
Anyone using C that wanted to move to C++ has already done so. For those left,
C++ is not an option for whatever reason.
D is not billed as betterC++ (yet), though Andrei is working on it (essentially
building an interface to C++ STL).
Learning a new language (as opposed to playing with it, which takes hours) takes
a lot if investment in time. So please somone help us pople new to it.
1. D BetterC blogs says no RAII.
It has RAII now (recently added).
2. No high level library available. C++ has the whole power of STL which can be
used in a better C mode. D has to use only C standard lib. STL gets you covered
for a lot. This is *huge* win for C++. I cannot overstate how important this is.
Most of Phobos is actually workable with betterC, it's just that nobody had gone
through and figured out what is.
3. No exceptions. (Blessing or curse ?) C++ in a betterC mode
People who use C are not really interested in exceptions. EH adds overhead
(there is no such thing as zero cost exceptions).
4. saftey. Full saftey is neither D as better C in C++. Arrays ? use STL. Uninit
locals varibales ? good compiler implementation -Wall -Werror.
D as betterC has full safety built in, via dip1000 etc. Experience shows that C
is not a safe language, neither is C++, despite STL.
5. Most C++ features cannot be inhibited with a compiler switch. Oh well. This
sucks.
6. No array overflows in D. STL solves this. Design by contract in D and not in
C++. Usefull for some projects.
STL solves it only if STL is used. That's a large barrier.
