A summary of D's design principles

[Steven Schveighoffer]

On Tue, 28 Sep 2010 15:36:32 -0400, retard <re at tard.com.invalid> wrote:

> Tue, 28 Sep 2010 13:22:09 -0400, bearophile wrote:
>> Jesse Phillips:
>>
>>> This is exactly how it should be marketed. It has the productivity of
>>> Python, other dynamic languages, with the performance and power of a
>>> natively compiled language.
>>
>> Most programmers are able to see that's very false, today.
>>
>> The main and maybe only advantage of D over C# is that it's
>> multi-platform. But today the Web is very important, and D can't be used
>> in browers.
>
> I don't find it surprising that people here agree, when one is bashing
> other languages. However, please consider that C# is *higher* level
> language than D and that means it by definition has better portability to
> multiple platforms. You already have a C# virtual machine for all major
> operating systems. C# even runs on a browser (silverlight/moonlight).

How is C# higher level than D?  C# is definitely a multi-platform  
language, and a good language.  But I consider them on the same level.   
Both are imperative compiled languages that use garbage collection.  C#  
has runtime reflection, D has compile-time reflection.  There's nothing I  
can see besides library support that puts C# above D, and that's not the  
language's fault.

>
>> I think that if D wants a chance to not die as many other C-inspired
>> languages have done in past, Walter needs lot of perseverance and to
>> keep slowly improving D for 8-10 more years. When D will be "good
>> enough" maybe some people will start to use it. But the implementation
>> of D2 is currently far from that point.
>
> D2 basically brought the number of supported libraries back to zero. It's
> almost like starting from scratch.

+1 dcollections :)

But on that note, most libraries in dsource are defunct anyways, and  
wouldn't compile on the latest D1.  Someone needs to clean that attic  
someday.

Also, D is able to use any C library with minimal effort.

> Jesse Phillips wrote:
>> This is exactly how it should be marketed. It has the productivity of
>> Python, other dynamic languages, with the performance and power of a
>> natively compiled language.
>
> I keep wondering, what language has the best productivity? How is it
> possible that people here STILL think that a single language could solve
> all problems. Is Python the right choice when creating interactive
> browser games? Is it the right choice for iPhone? Is it good for writing
> filesystem drivers? Is it good for high performance computing (vs FORTRAN
> et al).

Bleh, this is really a personal choice I think.  D is my preference when  
given a choice.  But most of the time, I'm not given a choice...

> Juanjo Alvarez wrote:
>> As a newcomer after one week learning and toying with D my productivity
>> is about 70% of the one I have with Python after 8 years doing Python,
>> and higher than the one I've with Java or C++.
>
> That's pretty awesome. You have maybe 0.001% of the libraries directly
> available, a buggy compiler, no 64-bit support, no formal spec etc. etc.
> And still you get about 70% of the productivity. And people say Python is
> maybe the most productive general purpose language out there. That's just
> incredible. My guess is, when D 2.0 is finally production ready, you're
> at least 100 times more productive than with Python. You can write 100000
> lines of code per day.

And you are still posting on this NG because...?

-Steve