Unofficial wish list status.(Jul 2008)

Sean Kelly sean at invisibleduck.org
Mon Jul 21 23:06:12 PDT 2008


Walter Bright wrote:
> Sean Kelly wrote:
>> I think part of the problem is that I simply don't agree with the mixed
>> functional / imperative approach that appears to be the overarching
>> direction of D.
> 
> No other language has tried such an approach before, and so we have yet 
> to know unequivocably if it is right or not. But I'm very optimistic 
> about it.

I'm hopeful, just not optimistic :-)

>> And while I do quite a bit of concurrent programming,
>> it's not in a way that will reap any benefit from this design.  In 
>> fact, the
>> language features added to support it are more of an annoyance than
>> they are an aid.  This may very well mean that D is simply not the
>> language for me in the long term.  However, with C and C++ as the
>> only real alternatives for systems programming, there aren't many
>> other options available.
> 
> There are several different paradigms for concurrent programming. D 
> won't be forcing one paradigm on anyone, it's sort of like oop vs free 
> functions. They both work, and you can mix & match them as desired.

See my other post regarding managing projects in C++.


Sean



More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list