Alex Rønne Petersen wrote: > On 29-07-2012 17:30, EngineerSpock wrote: >> There is a couple of questions. >> >> 1. What about interoperability of D and .NET platform? > > You should be able to write C routines in D that .NET's P/Invoke can > call. >> 2. What is the difference between pure D and D for .NET? > > D for .NET is dead because .NET is too limited to represent the > language, so describing this isn't really worthwhile. :)
That is "a lie" (save for you may not know). .net is a Microsoft product at the API-ish level. It "strikes a cord" with "real" programmers, surely. Alex needs to be more careful when he posts. .net is not dead. Not even NOT relevant for D. D is at the language level. (AKA, "the language level"). "It", cannot address higher level concerns, for it is not even evolved or relevant as a child. "Lord of the Flies" and D, have something in common? Learning perhaps? Is D an island of childish thought "promogulated" with the zeal of an adolescent "guitar hero", "re"inventing "rock-n-roll" and wanking his pecker? The island is overloaded with comers. "freedom reigns", and then you grow up. Then what? The drug stops. You realize your enemy is formidable. Your scope has been small. But your enemy knew that all along. And you might even realize that pissing in the wind and beating it, was your same old spiel. The wind is not your enemy. And neither is time. You battle, and are too quick to battle, that which you do not know. I assure you that all you battle is time. And time is not interested in your childish games. You are going to lose. A war that does not exist, save for only your "lordness", which begs the question is D a lemon tree worthy of pissing on? I think it is dismissabke without conjecture. Exclude the masturbatory adolescnet males and you have... tada! What? Nothing? Guitar hero. Lord of the flies? Close this wank room.
