On 12/13/10 8:30 PM, retard wrote:
Tue, 14 Dec 2010 02:56:45 +0100, Andrej Mitrovic wrote:
Why do /you/ take it personally?
You've misunderstood. I only wish the discussion was a bit more technical
and had less to do with opinions and hype. The reason is, a more
technical approach might solve technical problems in more efficient way.
But my goal is not to belittle social issues wrt language adoption.
Surely I understand reddit isn't lambda-the-ultimate.org and I'm glad
that the Go trolls didn't find the thread (yet). I just find this
behavior incomprehensible.
Well a reddit discussion is a reddit discussion opened to all flaws of
reddit's voting system. No need to get annoyed over it.
I enjoy reading snc_kid's posts, clearly knows the book. If anything I'd
want snc_kid to hang out more around here and provide good criticism.
Generally I'd much wish D's naysayers were simply of better quality; the
likes of iLiekCaeks and eternium are just not all that competent.
My personal stance on this matter is that I believe a more consistent and
flexible mechanism for operators would fit D.
That would be interesting. In the best-case scenario, what do you think
would be the positive impact of the flexible operators, as you envision
them, on the language?
I'm also a bit more of a
fan of C++0x concepts than those contraints shown in the slides. I
haven't really thought how it all would work out, but if the atmosphere
was more ambitious to this direction, I could participate more. But it
seems my vision conflicts badly with what D2 has become.
In all honesty, it is difficult to infer your vision from the trail of
your posts.
As of C++ concepts, let me mention a few facts fresh from the source (I
literally collected them an hour ago). C++ concepts are dead, buried,
and decomposing. Nobody is working on them and there is exactly one guy
in the world still talking about them. For a variety of theoretical and
practical purposes, they will never make it in C++.
D's constrained templates were introduced on 17 June 2008 and they've
been a smashing hit. Virtually all of Phobos uses them, and I'm sure a
lot of generic client code. They take half a minute to explain and solve
a difficult problem in a very simple manner.
I'm not saying you can't convince that C++-style concepts would be
superior. I'm saying you'll need to bring some solid evidence to the
table. If you don't, please don't claim you're being ostracized :o).
Andrei
