DMD 0.149 release - What is missing from D?

[Don Clugston]

Anders F Björklund wrote:
> Don Clugston wrote:
> 
>>>> The most severe symptom is that right now, D doesn't even have 
>>>> proper windows headers!
>>>
>>> But if you're not programming for Windows, that is not a problem... :-)
>>
>> True -- that's why I called it a symptom. The situation is no better 
>> for Linux, and seems like the Mac guys don't even have a compiler...
> 
> But is that a language problem ? Other than that D deliberately chose to 
> not be read-compatible with C headers, or linkable with C++ libraries ?

No, but it is a practical problem, which makes it hard to justify the 
use of D.

> We all agree that a C-header-to-D-import module tool would be useful,
> I think Walter even noted that on the DMD compiler page from the start.
> 
> But when I've translated the headers, the rest seems to be working...
> Except for templates of course, but that's "just a Mac problem" eh ?
> 
> Just think that there are bigger bugs with Phobos than just missing
> some Windows headers or having incomplete headers for the C stdlib...

I didn't intend to imply that there were no other symptoms... <g>

> I have a library here that I can compare implementations for, and out of 
> C++ and Objective-C and now D - the D version is the neatest one by far!

You're preaching to the converted <g>.

Right now we have a world-beating language, that's totally embarrassed 
about the state of its libraries (the IDE is a minor issue in 
comparison). It's a genuine, serious problem. It might not be too hard 
to fix, but that doesn't stop it from being a blocker right now.