Inlining Ref Functions
wbaxter at gmail.com
Mon May 18 12:14:52 PDT 2009
On Sun, May 17, 2009 at 11:12 AM, grauzone <none at example.net> wrote:
> grauzone wrote:
>> Bill Baxter wrote:
>>> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 9:16 PM, grauzone <none at example.net> wrote:
>>>>> 1. Some uber-hardcore performance freaks will not even consider D if
>>>>> has the
>>>>> slightest bit of performance overhead compared to C++.
>>>> I don't understand why D should pander to C++ freaks? If they think
>>>> language is great, they'll just continue programming C++. Nobody cares
>>>> them, and they will die a sad, lonely death.
>>>> Just look how Java/C# are taking over C++. Even if D is slightly less
>>>> efficient, it won't interfere with D's world domination plans.
>>>> Rather, one should avoid cloning the more annoying C++ features. (Ah
>>>> yes, of
>>>> course D makes them "better". Huh.) That's why we all use D in the first
>>> Performance is one of the major selling points of D. Why settle for a
>>> language with sub-standard tools and lack of safety if you don't care
>>> about performance? If you don't care about performance you're
>>> probably better off with one of those languages that runs on the JVM
>>> or CLR.
>> If you'd really care about performance, you'd code in ASM. Blurb.
> Let me be a bit more serious about it: the main selling point of D are
> template meta programming features, and the fact that it's compiled (that
> is, it's light weight enough, and doesn't require a clusterfuck of a
> VM/runtime). Neither JVM nor CLR provide such a language. Else I'd use them.
"Ho! what have we here
So very round and smooth and sharp?
To me 'tis mighty clear
This wonder of an Elephant Is very like a spear!"
To you, the things you listed may be the main selling points. To
others they may not be. They are nice features, to be sure, but I'm
not sure who gave you authority to declare those the "main selling
More information about the Digitalmars-d