C++ or D?

[Ola Fosheim Grøstad]

On Friday, 1 January 2021 at 16:23:45 UTC, SealabJaster wrote:
> Slightly off but also on topic but, has there been any general 
> consensus yet around standard pointer types (e.g. shared_ptr) 
> and standard allocator-aware data structures, or just in 
> general any discussions around non-GC memory management as part 
> of Phobos/core parts of D outside of "use/write a library"?

I don't know anything about any official positions other than the 
fact that Walter dislikes having more than one pointer type and 
is working on some kind of "liveness" verification for a C-style 
free/malloc regime, which is rather rare in other languages these 
days. Not really sure how that fits with modern code bases.

Isn't there some work on move-semantics to make C++ interfacing 
better? But shared_ptr is only for C++ interop, perhaps? Or is it 
meant for D-code?

To me it looks like things are a bit up-in-the-air at the moment.

And well, having many options that are incompatible would not be 
good for library interop, so choices have to be made to avoid 
"tower of Babel".

*shrugs*