This Week in D #9 - marketing discussion, final beta, special interview with Sönke

[weaselcat via Digitalmars-d-announce]

On Monday, 16 March 2015 at 13:21:13 UTC, ponce wrote:
> On Monday, 16 March 2015 at 13:11:56 UTC, weaselcat wrote:
>>> An example of a simple but fundamental issue are the defaults 
>>> of the built-in attributes. I think some of them, for 
>>> historical or compatibility reasons, are currently simply the 
>>> wrong way around (pure, @safe, final and scope should really 
>>> all be enabled by default, with scope providing recursive 
>>> guarantees) and using them properly completely destroys the 
>>> initial idea of having a clean language syntax. It's 
>>> sometimes really sad to see modern idiomatic D code degrading 
>>> into a mess of attributes and contract syntax noise. After 
>>> all, a clean syntax used to be one of the key selling points.
>>
>> +1 for this entire paragraph, sometimes D looks simple and 
>> elegant, other times it looks like someone puked attributes.
>
> Rust code is safe by default and it is littered with unsafe{ } 
> blocks.

I think this has more to do with Rust's extreme safety, many 
things doable in @safe D code would be no-no in Rust(i.e, you 
can't even manipulate pointers IIRC)