Slightly off the wall question about D strategy . . .

[bearophile]

Russel Winder:

> The standard paradigm increasingly in the HPC and large embedded systems
> spheres is to have C and C++ application code coordinated and tested
> using Python.

I think D needs to take more care of the needs of: GUI building, databases usage, heavy numeric computing. All three will enjoy some syntax/semantics support. The GUI may enjoy signals&slots and other bits, the HPC some ideas from languages like Chapel and X10.


> Is this dynamic/static synthesis something D should embrace and
> therefore get bindings for (D able to call into Python and Python able
> to call D -- cf. ctypes package in Python) or is it seeking to try and
> replace the whole shebang.

I think D wants to replace the whole group of languages. But I don't think it will be able to replace that dynamic languages glue, so it will need to interoperate. In D1 I have used a Python-D bridge named Pyd. When D2 is more polished I presume someone will eventually try to port Pyd to D2 or to create another similar tool.

Bye,
bearophile