Super-dee-duper D features

[Andrei Alexandrescu (See Website For Email)]

Nicolai Waniek wrote:
> janderson wrote:
>> What about using it for files that you are going to load at runtime
>> otherwise? XML ect...?
>>
>> -Joel
> 
> Loading the file belongs to runtime. Well, if it would take 10 minutes
> to load the file instead of 1 second if it was "loaded during
> compilation", that would be an argument for something like that - but I
> guess this won't be the case in most projects.
> 
> With your example: If you define something like that for compile time,
> it won't make it possible to change this dynamically, e.g. with a
> configuration file. If you write a super-D-duper library that loads file
> xyz and converts it to zyx, you won't want to sell the code (if it's not
> open source) so this possibility won't even fit to your business...

I think it should be clarified that the loading-config-files example is 
a strawman that we could leave in peace. It's the least interesting 
example of the bunch, and also the hardest to make interesting.

What we're talking here is about things that would improve life of 
everyone: better database integration, better regular expressions, 
proper reflection, better integration with other languages (e.g. Python, 
Javascript), remote procedure calls, persistence, networking...

> So, if "a" stands for "easy to learn, easy to use, fixed language" and
> "b" for "hard to learn because of dynamic language extension" you might
> get something like this for "not using mixins and that kind of stuff":
> 
> a [---|-----------] b
> 
> and the following, if you use them:
> 
> a [----------|----] b
> 
> Well I have to admit that there are some real good and well thought-out
> examples on how to reasonably use the new language features, but there
> will be more examples on how to _not_ use them. and the latter ones will
> be the ones with which we will have to struggle - and I don't want to
> struggle when programming, it usually is a joy! (and that's why I don't
> want to code in C++).

Technology can be annoying and have bad side effects, it's known ever 
since Ned Ludd whacked those sewing machines or whatever they were.


Andrei