Am 09.06.2011 03:24, schrieb Adam D. Ruppe: >> OTOH libraries are (hopefully) tested and stable > > That's what they *want* you to think! :-P > > Of course, I'm exaggerating a little, but I stand by it in many > cases: yeah, there's some hard stuff like crypto and gui, but > most stuff isn't that bad. >
I agree. Something else that comes to mind are database bindings - native D bindings that allow you to use D types and integrate well with ranges etc would certainly be preferable to using raw C bindings. > For that hard stuff though, there's always C libraries. The > popular C libs are generally fairly stable and not hard to use > in D, license permitting. > As long as not too many macros or custom types are involved and getting the D bindings isn't too hard > (Sometimes I think people forget that D has a *bigger* library > ecosystem than C, since every C library is also usable from D! > And thanks to D features, like scope guards and array ops, they > tend to be pretty easy to use straight up too.) > > >> Another example is GUI libraries > > Aye, GUI is the biggest example of hard stuff to implement well > that's also hard to use from C. > > Crypto isn't bad since C libraries implement them with a pretty > easy interface; it's generally just a handful of functions in > my experience. (Contrast to guis where it's often hundreds of > classes each with dozens of methods and callbacks... just writing > out their prototypes can take a while!) Ok
