Ruling out arbitrary cost copy construction?

[so]

On Fri, 29 Oct 2010 20:15:09 +0300, dsimcha <dsimcha at yahoo.com> wrote:

> 1.  Crufty old C/C++ programmers.
>
> 2.  People who like dynamic languages but need more speed and ability to  
> do
> low-level work.  D is about the most flexible
> close-to-the-metal/efficient/statically typed language out there.
>
> 3.  Java/C# programmers who want a language that isn't absurdly verbose.
>
> 4.  New programmers who don't have much already invested in any other  
> language and
> want something advanced, modern and w/o tons of legacy cruft.
>
> The first **may** want eager copying.  The latter three almost certainly  
> won't.

If you believe that, you have no valid reason following/using D, with a  
community like you described you can't get anywhere.
Can't speak for other languages or other people but for me if someone is  
coming from C/C++, not because he sucks but the language is not enough.
If you think D is easier by margin, you are delusional. If D being so much  
easier not the case why do a C user want this nonsense transition? Answer  
is "Quality of life".
C/C++ has everything for a "crufty old" programmer, he doesn't need a  
transition. Who needs this transition is the ones that pushing the  
language limits.

Some people should really get rid of this C/C++ complex, hate..
I really hate to say this but you got to accept an average C/C++  
programmer is much better than best of any higher language programmer. If  
one argue against this, i got nothing else to say, he needs to wake up and  
check the games he plays, the OS he uses, anything but "simple string  
processing".

Thank you!

-- 
Using Opera's revolutionary e-mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/