If you have to learn just one programming language

[BCS]

Hello Don,

> BCS wrote:
> 
>> Hello retard,
>> 
>>> Mon, 31 May 2010 18:23:18 +0200, Pelle wrote:
>>> 
>>>> On 05/31/2010 05:43 PM, retard wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> For example the lambda syntax is terribly verbose in D compared to
>>>>> Scala or Haskell.
>>>>> 
>>>> But way better than in java, C, C++ or almost any other language.
>>>> 
>>> So basically if I'm offering you $100000 and $10, you're taking $10
>>> because it's more than $1 or $2 or any value between $3 and $4.
>>> Great logic.
>>> 
>> I'd say it's more like me taking $10 over $10.14 because I don't have
>> to deal with the coins.
>> 
>>>>> D&  DMD are unstable, badly specified, buggy and most dsource
>>>>> projects are deprecated (D1) or dead.
>>>>> 
>>>> True, but it's not like D isn't moving anywhere in that aspect.
>>>> 
>>> Not sure about that. I'm still waiting for proper .stringof
>>> documentation
>>> 
>> I see a lot of fruit that's a lot lower and juicer than that. For
>> that matter, you can read the source, figure it out your self and
>> write the docs for it. Heck, even if you just slapped together some
>> notes and posted them in an bugzilla ticket it would be something.
>> 
>>> and a formal spec for SafeD (I really want to know what it is
>>> exactly and what it is not)..
>>> 
>> Um, it's easy to figure out of something is or isn't allowed in
>> safeD; write a program and try it.
>> 
> That doesn't work. Pointer arithmetic is forbidden in safeD, but
> currently accepted by the compiler.
> But don't worry about this stuff, it should be fixed fairly soon.


In that case, I'd say that the reason there is no formal spec for SafeD is 
that there is no spec at all.

Formal spec or no, a SafeD that's not enforced by the compiler is of little 
or no usable value, and I'm leaning towards the latter.

-- 
... <IXOYE><