"The Case for D" on Ycombinator

[Walter Bright]

bearophile wrote:
> (Time ago I have
> suggested a "type" type, to replace some functional-style template
> usage with simpler imperative-style compile time functions, but it
> was not appreciated. Maybe also because it introduces yet another way
> to do the same thing, despite it looks like a simpler way).

Doing type manipulation in D templates can be a bit clunky, but:

1. it is far easier than in C++
2. it is doable
3. the clunkiness is in the template body, not the usage of the template

and at the moment we have more critical things that need to get done.