The Expressive C++17 Coding Challenge in D

[Ola Fosheim Grøstad]

On Wednesday, 14 February 2018 at 10:17:21 UTC, psychoticRabbit 
wrote:
> I believe the programming langauges of the future, and the ones 
> people should invest their time learning, are those that can be 
> best understood in the least amount of time.

Yes, I would say so, unless they bring something new to the table 
like formal verification (proven correctness) or some kind of 
expert system geared towards a set of common domains (e.g. data 
flow).

> This is because programs are getting larger and more complex, 
> and to understand them at all, they have to be simple to 
> understand.

Right, so which is an argument in favour of agent based systems. 
Kind of the direction that has happened on the server side with 
micro services.

> C++ is not simple. It never has been. The so called 
> 'modernisation' of it is not helping me to change my mind about 
> it ;-)

Right, because, even though C was simple, it isn't simple to 
debug, so C++ has all that + a wide variety of overlapping 
features. So C++ cannot become simple.

> It's time to stop 'improving' C++ and redesign it from scratch 
> - or move to D.

Well, yes, but then D needs to make a case for itself and do a 
reset so that the disadvantages in switching is offset by the 
advantages. Either that or some other language will squeeze in, 
which is ok too. I don't care who does it, could even be Rust if 
they add some features, but it should happen. Right.