dynamic classes and duck typing

dsimcha dsimcha at yahoo.com
Fri Nov 27 20:40:53 PST 2009


== Quote from Walter Bright (newshound1 at digitalmars.com)'s article
> bearophile wrote:
> > I see, you want a Swiss army knife language :o)
> >
> > Before choosing a design I suggest to look at how both Java and C#4 have done
it, few random links about C#4:
> > http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd264736%28VS.100%29.aspx
> > http://blogs.msdn.com/cburrows/archive/2008/10/27/c-dynamic.aspx
> >
http://geekswithblogs.net/sdorman/archive/2008/11/16/c-4.0-dynamic-programming.aspx
> I think the D approach is superior, because it offers many more ways of
> doing things (it's implemented nearly completely as a library feature).
> C# was forced to do it with a magic type because it doesn't support
> templates.

Sometimes I feel like there should be a law similar to Greenspun's Law for
language design:

Any sufficiently long-lived language that promises to be "simpler" than C++ and D
will grow to contain an ad-hoc, bug-ridden, informally specified, slow
implementation of half of C++ and D.



More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list