C++ or D?

[Paulo Pinto]

On Thursday, 31 December 2020 at 07:17:45 UTC, RSY wrote:
> On Wednesday, 30 December 2020 at 21:03:36 UTC, Paulo Pinto 
> wrote:
>> On Thursday, 24 December 2020 at 08:36:54 UTC, RSY wrote:
>>> On Wednesday, 23 December 2020 at 19:00:14 UTC, evilrat wrote:
>>>> [...]
>>>
>>> C++ you need to write duplicate code (.h and .cpp)
>>>
>>> C++ you need to care about header include order
>>>
>>> C++ you need to forward declare everything you gonna use if 
>>> it is not included before
>>>
>>> C++ you need to waste time waiting for compile
>>>
>>
>> Fixed with C++20 modules.
>>
>> I am already playing with the experimental support on VC++.
>>
>>> C++ you need to fight to get proper reflection
>>>
>>
>> Coming in C++23, and partially available already with a mix of 
>> type traits and constexpr.
>>
>>
>> I am all good for D vs C++, but one needs to update their 
>> knowledge specially when the audience is up to date with 
>> latest ISO C++'s capabilities.
>
> It's like the story with the GC
>
> You want everyone to like D because it has a GC despite it 
> being not updated in ages, and proved to not scale well
>
> You do the same with modules and reflections now, D is clearly 
> better but for some reasons you don't want people to believe 
> that, worse you want people to see them as inferior to the poor 
> C++ one, because you clearly didn't mention any of that poor 1 
> phase compilation model
>
> What is your goal here? you for sure don't want D to take off

It would be nice to see D taking off, I just happen not to be 
blind to the competition.

That is the beauty of being an enterprise polyglot consultant, I 
get to pick what customers want, and they want eco-systems and 
platforms.

Which not only use GC in domains that D fails to, also get to 
catch up with almost every feature that made D a better choice 10 
years ago.

Blind advocacy won't get new users.