Steve Yegge's rant on The Next Big Language

[BCS]

Reply to Jarrett,

> "Jarrett Billingsley" <kb3ctd2 at yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:eqr5o5$16us$1 at digitalmars.com...
> 
>> "BCS" <BCS at pathlink.com> wrote in message
>> news:eqq7nq$2tut$1 at digitalmars.com...
>> 
>>> Half?, more like one or two hard misses and a few more close calls.
>>> 
>> Well let's see:
>> 
> And I just wanted to add that this is considering _language features_,
> not things that can be done with libraries (excluding those points
> which explicitly mention libraries).  So yes, you can do Perl-like
> regexps, multiple return values, iterators, generators, and list
> comprehensions with libraries.   I think it's awesome that D can
> pretty much provide these without much trouble, but these are not
> language features.
> 

To pick at a few:
Does any language do interators for user type as language features? You have 
to write them your self in every language I know of. In D, all the types 
you can get without a lib can be iterated over without a lib.

And I'll admit that the mult return is a bit of a stretch.

But *I* don't care if things come from a lib or from a feature, just how 
well they get the job done. And I would never use a language that doesn't 
need libs. It would be WAY to big.

But that's all just my opinion. Really my point is that for the most part 
D, in one form or another, has most of the things mentioned .