Stroustrup's talk on C++0x

[eao197]

On Mon, 20 Aug 2007 23:26:33 +0400, Robert Fraser  
<fraserofthenight at gmail.com> wrote:

> eao197 Wrote:
>
>> Yes! But C++ is doing that without breaking existing codebase. So
>> significant amount of C++ programmers needn't look to D -- they will  
>> have
>> new advanced features without dropping their old tools, IDE and  
>> libraries.
>>
>> I'm affraid that would play against D :(
>>
>> Current C++ is far behind D, but D is not stable, not mature, not  
>> equiped
>> by tools/libraries as C++. So it will took several years to make D
>> competitive with C++ in that area. But if in 2010 (it is only 2.5 year
>> ahead) C++ will have things like lambdas and autos (and tons of  
>> libraries
>> and army of programmers), what will be D 'killer feature' to attract
>> C++ programmers? And not only C++, at this time D would compete with new
>> versions of C#, Java, Scala, Nemerle (probably) and with some of
>> functional languages (like Haskell and OCaml).
>
> You seem to forget that D is evolving, too. C++ might get a lot of the  
> cool D features (albiet with ugly syntax), but by that time, D might  
> have superpowers incomprehensible to the C++ mind.

I didn't. From my point of view, permanent envolvement is a main D's  
problem. I can't start use D on my work regulary because D and Tango is  
not stable enough. I can't start teach students D because D 1.0 is  
obsolete and D 2.0 is not finished yet.

To outperform C++ in 2009-2010 D must have full strength now and must be  
stable during some years to proof that strength in some killer  
applications.

-- 
Regards,
Yauheni Akhotnikau