Is D more cryptic than C++?

[Abrahm]

"Jesse Phillips" <jessekphillips+d at gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:jb6qfv$1kut$1 at digitalmars.com...
> What bearophile was referring to was the use of templates is common.

Are you sure about that? What say you Bear?

> D's
> templates have the advantage of being easier on the eyes and more
> powerful (with the inclusion of 'static if' in the language).

Having "come from" C++land, and knowing what some people do with it, 
making it EASIER to apply templates does not seem necessarily a good 
thing to me. (Ref: template metaprogramming). That said, does your 
statement above about D's template machinery being "powerful" etc., mean 
"it's easier to do template metaprogramming in D"? If so, I, personally, 
do not find that any asset at all (though I know some surely will, for 
there have been books written on that "abhorrence").

>
> On Wed, 30 Nov 2011 06:14:34 -0600, Abrahm wrote:
>
>> "bearophile" <bearophileHUGS at lycos.com> wrote in message
>> news:jb566l$20rr$1 at digitalmars.com...
>>> Abrahm:
>>>
>>>> I don't think I like that. D's 'sort' is some kind of construct
>>>> instead of a function?
>>>
>>> It's essentially a function template.
>>
>> OK. Whatever it is though, it doesn't look like "language proper"
>> material. That is, I'll relegate it to libraryland.
>>
>>
>>>
>>>> Not intuitive at all. Seemingly incorrect from a design standpoint
>>>> (but I'm not thinking about it heavily).
>>>
>>> Better getting used to that kind of D code :-)
>>>
>>>
>> Uh oh, is that a warning to the weary? Should I look for a post called
>> "D Quirks"? If you want to make such a list, great, but if you do,
>> please try to go from high-level things to esoteric things so those 
>> not
>> concerned about the latter don't have to wade through them or figure 
>> out
>> in which classification they belong.
>>
>> Looks like a good topic for a new thread: D Quirks. I'm too lazy to
>> start a new thread right now.
>