A gentle critque..

[Kyle Furlong]

Lars Ivar Igesund wrote:
> Ben Cooley wrote:
> 
>> Hi Lars,
>>
>> I'm rooting around for a more practical language that can be integrated
>> into a
>> very large mixed C/C++ codebase.  D just can't do what I need it to do,
>> and it's really too bad because I have followed D and really actually do
>> like it.
>>
>> The code base we work with has several problems, one being the inclusion
>> of more than 20 external C and C plus plus third party libraries, as well
>> as utilization
>> of the linux and windows api's.  And more importantly occasional
>> instability due to the use of C unsafe programming practices.
>>
>> I'm posting this because I suspect that the quiet majority of C plus plus
>> programmers out there agree with me.  We simply aren't interested in
>> participating in a crusade to make D popular.  We just want something that
>> can do what we really need, and there are an awful lot of C and C plus
>> plus projects out there that depend on being able to parse C and C plus
>> plus headers and likely always will be.
>>
>> I'm not trying to offend anyone, and I really don't expect anyone to agree
>> necessarily.  Just want to put forward my opinion as to what made a
>> language like C plus plus with its radical new programming paradigm
>> popular.. and how D deviates from this path.
> 
> Yeah, I see that you have an immediate need, see my other answer to you on
> how I think you should fix it ;) IMHO, you shouldn't mix C and C++ in this
> discussion, they are two different kind of problems (or C's problems in
> this regard is a subset to those of C++).
> 
> You can link C object files directly, you only need the API declared in D,
> and in many cases this conversion is trivial. This is because C at the
> bottom is a simple language.
> 
> C++ is not a simple language, and neither is D. Both has a common stem in C,
> but they wildly diverge in design goals, and in many places in
> functionality. This makes it difficult, no matter what, to make them play
> nice together. The brute force solution is to make wrappers, which usually
> involves exposing the C++ lib as C functions, and then wrap it back in D
> objects. wxD do this.
> 
> But you make one faulty assumption regarding the life of D and it's growth,
> and that is that all D fans actually comes from C/C++ land. Equally many
> come from Java and C#, people that often like the language, but is
> dissatisfied with the speed options. And I think quite a few from the
> scripting camp might take an interest too, when projects such as DSP get
> into release. D is a different language (although it is perfect for C++
> users), and it's possible uses range much further.
> 

This last paragraph is so true. I am one of these people who come from 
C# because of the need for a compiled people. D is not just c++ 2006.

-- 
Kyle Furlong // Physics Undergrad, UCSB

"D is going wherever the D community wants it to go." - Walter Bright