comparison of D2 and C++0x

[Bill Baxter]

Brian Hay wrote:
> Denton Cockburn wrote:
>> Has anyone thought to do a feature comparison of proposed D2 and C++Ox
>> features?
> 
> What's the point? As I understand it, C++0x won't come into effect until 
> 2009 and implementations will follow long after that. 

It's relevant for people trying to decide if it's worth their while long 
term to change languages.

> So comparisons of 
> an implemented and specified (albeit not yet stable) D2 and C++0x with 
> no implementation for years are largely irrelevant at the present time.

I think you can already get versions of g++ with preliminary 
implementations of some of the C++0x features (concepts was one, I 
think).  So while the big commercial players may drag their feet for 
years, you may be able to get most or at least many C++0x features a lot 
sooner.  Of course you won't have much choice in compiler, and it will 
probably be beta quality and subject to breaking changes, but isn't that 
what you'll face if you use D?  Except with C++0x you'll have near 100% 
assurance that the rest of the world will be joining you eventually.


> Also, a comparison of features may not accurately represent the benefits 
> of D over C++0x in that they each may implement a given feature but in 
> the case of D fewer design compromises are necessary as it doesn't have 
> the legacy cruft of C++. Any comparison would have to be both 
> qualitative and quantitative to be fair, and even then many people will 
> ignore such qualitative (subjective) comparisons. :-)

But some won't and will read it with interest.

I think a detailed feature comparison would be great.  It would help me 
find out more about what C++0x will and wont have in an easy way, by 
relating it to things I already know about D.  Also it would hopefully 
give me fodder to use on C++ folks who say they're just going to wait 
for C++0x.  I'll be able to say "ah, but even when it finally debuts, 
C++0x wont have ______".


--bb