C++ or D?

[Ola Fosheim Grøstad]

On Thursday, 31 December 2020 at 18:13:40 UTC, Imperatorn wrote:
> I was a bit unclear. I meant features as in built in language 
> constructs etc, not necessarily like keywords and so on.

You mean like associative arrays and dynamic arrays? If so then I 
guess people have different taste, I think it was a mistake to 
make those builtins...

I find code harder to read when symbols (e.g. "!") have so many 
meanings in D. I am creating my own experimental unicode-syntax 
now where each symbol has only one meaning... kinda like a 
prototype for testing the idea of using the full unicode charset 
for programming. So not necessarily a D specific issue, but D is 
a nice testbed for experimenting as it has so many features.

> Hmm, regarding features I'd like in C++, maybe better 
> metaprogramming and fewer keywords? Haven't thought about that

I've never run into meta programming problems that I cannot deal 
with in C++ in way that works out ok in the end, but sometimes 
you have to search the web. Fortunately there are many "recipes" 
for big languages... without that... uhm. Then C++ would be a 
very difficult thing to handle :-D.

What I don't like about C++ is that things get verbose, but 
verbosity has some advantages when programs get very large 
because then you need more context to understand what is going on 
and where things are coming from.

It isn't obvious that something that is good for a medium sized 
program will be good for a very large program (e.g. "where did 
this symbol come from?"). You won't really find out until you've 
tried... but most D programs are small, so. No need to worry 
about that...