D - more or less power than C++?

[Miles]

Walter Bright wrote:
> I see this often and am a bit perplexed by it. What power do you feel is 
> missing?

I hardly post anything to the NG, most of the time I just read to see
how D is maturing... but I would like to leave my opinion on this subject:

1. const parameters and member functions

Countless times this saved me. I just can't imagine references being
passed in and out of functions without something explicitly saying that
the function is expected or not to modify it.

2. implicit function template instantiation

D templates are great, but I miss just this one feature. Perhaps because
that I'm too used to C++...

3. array literals and initialization

Don't know how D still don't support this, while we see things like
regexes and scope guard comming in... (not that I didn't like those
features, but I think that array literals should have came first).

4. library

This is a really weak point in D. STL is not that great, and I can't
imagine someone programming in C++ without using some additional library
like boost, CC++, Qt, MFC or (that Borland one that I just forgot the
name)... But Phobos is simply out-of-question, it was created without
project (I'm not a Software Engeneering fan, but at least I understand
the importance to design and document before coding).

Also, the standard library should rely on the operating system, not on libc.


Now a bit off-topic, I'm also one of the guys that would like to see
true, pure booleans in the language. I don't know why D should inherit
such stupid behavior from C/C++, and the excuse that "D should be a
sucessor to C" does not get at all... I believe that, before being a
sucessor to C, D is a completely *new* language, no one will code in D
with just C knowledge. So, if we are going to make things again, lets
make them right.

Best regards,
Miles.