d future or plans for d3

[Ruslan Mullakhmetov]

On 2011-12-18 00:56:33 +0000, Timon Gehr said:

> C++11 does not change the relation between D and C++ a lot. Why do you 
> think it does?

Because it incorporates many features D declared to be unique to it 
over C++ like
   - thread local variables
   - explicit concurrency model
   - type deduction
   - variadic templates
   - generalized constant expressions

Some comparison is made at http://d-programming-language.org/cpp0x.html

> The language does not have to be changed to get that to work.

The C language doesn't have to be changed to get OOP working. There are 
 libraries written in plain C satisfying all requirements of OOP, e.g. 
libav. Nevertheless C++ was born.

 So, what do i propose. To get it explicit in language and working out 
of the box, like in Erlang. the only benefit over Erlang i currently 
see that D is much more friendly for newcomers from C-like camp. The 
another is possibility for embedded programming. I was surprised that 
there are attempts to use MAS at embedded programming e.g. robotics 
where different controlers are autonomous and communicate with each 
others.

> 
>> comparing to other modern languages
> 
> IMO that is not a very important question. It is not a contest.

  I thin that this is exactly context. I try to explain. D has 
reputation of marginal language with no concrete niche. For embedded 
programming C++ and rather plain C is used. For high level programming 
Java/C# are good enough. For distributed programming - Erlang. For 
scientific - Matlab, python, fortran, C. When i tell somebody about D 
the first question i get except community, maturity and stability is 
where it can be used. Where it gives true advantage. And i can not 
answer.
  So i propose to introduce new paradigm, despite of it is _not_ 
technical problem. it like ajax where combination of parts gave result 
greater then sum of parts.
  One may consider it as marketing trick to attract attention to D.

> On 12/18/2011 01:09 AM, Ruslan Mullakhmetov wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> 
>> I want to ask you about D future, i mean next big iteration of D and
>> propose some new feature, agent-based programming. Currently, after
>> introducing C++11 i see the only advantages of D over C++11 except
>> syntax sugare is garbage collector and modules.
>> 
> 
> C++11 does not change the relation between D and C++ a lot. Why do you 
> think it does?
> 
>> I recentrly attended student school (workshop) on multi-agent systems
>> (MAS)and self-organizing sysetems. I was really impressed and thought
>> that this probably is the silver bullet which Brucks declared to be
>> absent. I mean agent-based programming as foundation of self-organzing
>> systems. If you are interested you can find a lot of information by
>> googling.
>> 
>> So I would like to get your feedback to introduce new paradigm, paradigm
>> of agent programming into D.
>> 
>> Actually, I'm not deep into MAS, but as far as i know it's just
>> autonomous class, i.e. class that has it's own independent context of
>> execution that can communicate with other parties (agents) and can
>> affect on environment if any (like ant).
>> 
>> So it would be nice to have this in language core/library.
>> 
>> There is erlang that already satisfied all requirements (as far as i
>> know) of MAS language. So the question is does D need to take this
>> paradigm? - Or concentrate on its current paradigms? The only advatnage
>> ovder erlang i see is that D propose itself as embedded programming
>> language which erlang do not satisfy (am i right?).
>> 
>> So i need your feedback on the following:
>> (i) do you think that D needs to adsorb agent-programming paradigm
> 
> The language does not have to be changed to get that to work.
> 
>> (ii) can it benefit D
> 
> Yes.
> 
>> comparing to other modern languages
> 
> IMO that is not a very important question. It is not a contest.


-- 
BR, Ruslan Mullakhmetov