Slightly off the wall question about D strategy . . .

[Jesse Phillips]

Russel Winder Wrote:

> 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.

D is aiming to be a systems and applications programming language. In the eyes of many here, D makes static programming feel as easy as dynamic programming, but what you are actually asking is whether D wishes to also replace embedded languages.

The CLR/JVM are making improvements which increase performance of dynamic languages on their virtual machine. C# has gone a step farther to take advantage of communicating with dynamic languages by adding the 'dynamic' type. And best I can tell D's 'variant' type is already a close second to it.

I think D as positioned well for accepting embedded languages. PyD[1] has done some very nice stuff already in D1 and Python. And the Lua bindings[2] look to integrate very nicely with D1 and D2. I haven't worked with either of these, so I do not know their actually usability.

Personally I will probably be combining D and Lua in more of my projects.

1. http://pyd.dsource.org/
2. http://www.dsource.org/projects/luad/wiki