C++

[Don Clugston]

Sean Kelly wrote:
> David Medlock wrote:
>> Its adherents rarely surprise me anymore.
>>
>> Read my post on LTU and snk_kid's response:
>> http://lambda-the-ultimate.org/node/1583#comment-19266
>>
>> I am not trying to single him out, but the responses are pretty common 
>> in my (arguably anectdotal) experience.

> I think one problem is that some people just look at the spec to learn 
> about the language, and the spec is quite sparse in places.  I don't 
> think it mentions implicit template instantiation, and mention of some 
> other features is hard to find.

On the "Comparison with other languages" page, it explicitly says that D 
doesn't have implicit function template instantiation. AND it's been 
removed from the 'future directions' page.
When I first looked at D, the absence of IFTI was the #1 turn-off. It's 
only because I saw it in the 'future directions' page that I gave the 
language a chance.

>> Walter you have your work cut out for you.
>> Like most things in IT, the human/political issues outweigh the 
>> technical ones.

True, but I'm going to stick up for snk_kid. Based on the spec, he's 
quite justified in thinking D doesn't have IFTI and probably never will; 
and the implications for library design are huge. He's justified in 
thinking that D template libraries will never be as powerful as C++.
When you read the spec, you should get the impression that D templates 
are far more powerful than C++ templates.