GCC 4.6
Walter Bright
newshound2 at digitalmars.com
Wed Nov 24 15:25:26 PST 2010
Emil Madsen wrote:
> And yea, bearophile brings up a lot of nice features, and Walter would
> never have a chance to implement all of them himself, which might be
> good, if everything bearophile suggests got into the language, we would
> have this major language noone would ever be able to learn, nor use.
> However, if we succeed in implementing the best ideas I do think we'll
> end up with a superb output, however I do think we need to discuss a lot
> of issues and features, and thats why I love bearophiles postings,
> simply because it gives the community a lot to discuss.
>
> Just my opinion. - But I do think discussing a lot of features, even the
> ones not really related, will help out the language in the end.
I think bearophile does a valuable service to us by bringing up discussion topics.
My gripe is when he lists things that he wishes D did when D already does them
and has for years. Case in point: D imports. It's irksome when he often writes
from the perspective of assuming that D does it wrong while other languages are
assumed to do it right. Case in point: design by contract, and his assumption
that dmd was a primitive compiler that did not do data flow analysis while
praising llvm's.
My concern about that is that with the volume of his posts, I will miss some of
them, and people inexperienced with D will presume those mistakes and
misunderstandings are correct.
I have no issue at all with bringing up factual shortcomings of D, even when I
disagree about whether they are actual shortcomings or not. For example, it is a
fact that D does not check for integer arithmetic overflow. Whether that's a
problem or not is a fine topic for discussion.
More information about the Digitalmars-d
mailing list