GSoC Mentor Summit Observations and D Marketing

[Manu]

On 25 October 2011 13:31, Don <nospam at nospam.com> wrote:

> On 25.10.2011 11:40, bearophile wrote:
>
>> Gor Gyolchanyan:
>>
>>  D doesn't have a religion. D is an atheistic language.
>>>
>>
>> I doubt this. There was even an attempt to write a D Zen.
>>
>
> That was by you, though, wasn't it? <g>
> OTOH I agree that it's got an underlying philosophy. It was clearly
> motivated by a love/hate relationship with C++.
> "C++ done right" is still not too far wrong, although it seems that when
> you do C++ correctly, it looks like some other languages as well...
>

Except every other example of C++ done right leads to a managed runtime :)

It's this "C++ done right" idea that sold me on D, except after spending
some time, I wonder if D is quite sure about what it is?
I bought in with the clear impression (and "C++ done right" certainly
suggests) that it was a modernised systems programming language. Surely this
is(/was?) the primary goal?
That's definitely what appeals to me... it's compiled to machine code, has
uninhibited hardware access, and that's the only niche that it cleanly fills
which isn't occupied by any other languages.

But I also see a lot of conversation about really high level features which
are more realistically suited in something like C#. If these things fit
neatly into D without compromise, then sure, why not. I love cool features!
:)
But is D making any compromise to that end? I haven't been following long
enough to know...

@Don: The only thing I really care about is that the compiler never chooses
double intrinsically.. that will prove which way the language leans to me ;)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.puremagic.com/pipermail/digitalmars-d/attachments/20111025/2212992a/attachment.html>