Design Patterns == weakness in language

[Hasan Aljudy]

Brad Anderson wrote:
> This might be a bit OT, but I often wonder if D is going to succeed C/C++/Java
> long-term given that it's not abstracting away a majority of known design
> patterns.  Or, maybe that's just D 2.0 and we need to be patient.  <g>
> 
> http://newbabe.pobox.com/~mjd/blog/2006/09/11/#design-patterns
> 
> BA

Adding to Steve and David, I think the fundemental problem in the 
article's arguments is that "design patterns" are not complicated tasks 
that everone has to implement all the time.
Even if they were, it's still not neccessary to integrate them with the 
language itself if it's possible to implement them in the standard library.
For example, everyone needs to output text to the screen, but why should 
it be a part of the language itself when it could be implemented as a 
library function?
Do most people write containors and iterators by themselves all the 
time? Do they ever have to?

Comparing that with manually implementing subroutines in assembly is 
redeclious.