C++ or D?

[Ola Fosheim Grøstad]

On Wednesday, 30 December 2020 at 19:24:19 UTC, sighoya wrote:
> In my eyes, adding proper support for opImplicitCoercion 
> enables the reuse of interfaces as typeclasses, yielding more 
> potential for idiomatic development than utilizing C++ concepts 
> alone.

Not sure what you mean? A D interface is a dynamic runtime 
feature?


>> Btw, did D ever get to add nested template parameters? I know 
>> people asked for it a long time ago, but cannot remember if 
>> that was resolved somehow?
>
> Oh, what's this? Did you mean true Higher Kinded Types (HKT)
>
> ```
> fun(R,S,T:R=>S)
> ```


Sort of, in C++ it would be something like this

template<template<typename> class OuterName>
void myfunction(OuterName<int> x){ stuff(); }


> That would be great, but they're simply arguing to use alias 
> symbols instead. The downside with aliases is however a more 
> restricted type inference:

That is clearly a type unification bug. An alias isn't an alias 
if it interferes with type unification!