My Meeting C++ Keynote video is now available

[H. S. Teoh]

On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 03:57:36PM +0000, Adam D. Ruppe via Digitalmars-d-announce wrote:
> On Monday, 14 January 2019 at 14:56:00 UTC, bachmeier wrote:
> > Only a small sliver of programming involves anything where "overhead
> > of a runtime" is an issue. I hope you intend this comment as
> > pertaining to Better C usage.
> 
> Real D is the true better C. These improvements can improve in various
> situations.
> 
> That said though, I'd be against removing built-in classes and
> interfaces.  They are useful in a lot of places built in...

Yeah, much as I'm a big promoter of struct-based range-based template
style D code, classes and interfaces do still have their place.  When
you need runtime dynamic polymorphism, it just makes sense to use
classes and interfaces instead of trying to bandage your way around
structs and CT introspection.  I'm still searching for a theoretical
model that would bridge the gap between the two and make one unified
model, but for now, they each still have their place.


> though I kinda wish the runtime code was a bit thinner and lighter
> too.

Yeah, the whole thing about the monitor field IMO is an unnecessary
burden on a use case that isn't always needed.  If synchronized classes
or whatever needs it, then it should be an ABI specific to synchronized
classes.  Everybody else shouldn't need to pay tax on it if they never
actually need to use it.


T

-- 
Shin: (n.) A device for finding furniture in the dark.