Is D a cult?

[Walter Bright]

retard wrote:
> Let's see what features I had in mind:
> 
> - Algrebraic data types

std.variant covers this.

> - Pattern matching (extension to enum/string/integer accepting switch)

Andrei and Sean have shown how to do that nicely with existing language 
features.

> - Higher kinded types

Don't know what that is.

> - Tuples (no auto-folding, real product types)

Tuples can be better, I agree.

> - Built-in variants (real sum types)

std.variant works fine. Don't know how having them be built-in would 
improve things.

> - Currying, lazy evaluation

Already supports this.

> - Fusion optimizations (e.g. list and stream fusion)

Andrei demonstrated how to do this neatly with ranges.

> - Type classes

Don't know what this is.

> - basic control constructs are expressions, not statements 

Perhaps, but I still think it's necessary for D do be a { } Algol-style 
language. Nevertheless, I've demonstrated how this can be simply done 
using existing features.

>(e.g. unify if-then-else and : ? into a functional if-then-else)

What's the difference between ?: and functional if-then-else?

> - better syntax for lambdas

The lambda syntax is as good as it's going to get without throwing out a 
*lot* of syntax compatibility.


> [1] if immutability is considered functional
> [2] if type inference is considered functional

Several of your points are not, to my mind, fundamental issues of 
functional programming. To me, the foundations of FP are immutability, 
purity, and closures, which got a lot of attention. Most of your points 
are already supported by D, although not quite as conveniently as in 
many other languages.