On C/C++ undefined behaviours

[Nick Sabalausky]

"retard" <re at tard.com.invalid> wrote in message 
news:i4r1pk$rm8$1 at digitalmars.com...
> Sat, 21 Aug 2010 18:31:16 -0700, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
>
>> But still, being able to consistently match C++ at what it's good at and
>> C# and Java at what they're good at in one language is big, and I really
>> don't think that we're there yet. I don't know how efficient we are in
>> comparison to C++, but I expect that there are a number of areas which
>> need improvement (things like inlining, the garbage collector, etc.) if
>> we want the average D program to match the average C++ program for
>> efficiency. And we definitely don't match Java and C# for ease of use
>> and maintainability at this point, but most of that is simply an issue
>> of libraries and tools, both of which are being worked on. So, we're
>> getting there, but I don't think that we're there yet. And certainly,
>> once we do get there, there's no reason to stay only "on par" with them.
>> We should always be looking to improve D and its libraries and tools.
>
> Should D also look more academic than Haskell, F#, Scala, DDC, Clojure,
> BitC, Factor, and Ur/Web ?

"More academic"? No, D tries to stick to goals that are actually *good* ones 
;)

That's kinda like asking if it should try to be more obfuscated than 
brainfuck, or try to have less enterprise-level library support than Logo.