Does D have too many features?

[Dmitry Olshansky]

On 29.04.2012 3:25, foobar wrote:
> On Saturday, 28 April 2012 at 20:43:38 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
>> On 04/28/2012 09:58 PM, foobar wrote:
>>> On Saturday, 28 April 2012 at 18:48:18 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
>>>> Andrei and I had a fun discussion last night about this question. The
>>>> idea was which features in D are redundant and/or do not add
>>>> significant value?
>>>>
>>>> A couple already agreed upon ones are typedef and the cfloat, cdouble
>>>> and creal types.
>>>>
>>>> What's your list?
>>>
>>> D has a lot of ad-hock features which make the language
>>> needlessly large and complex. I'd strive to replace these with
>>> better general purpose mechanisms.
>>>
>>> My list:
>>> * I'd start with getting rid of foreach completely. (not just
>>> foreach_reverse).
>>
>>
>> foreach is very useful. Have you actually used D?
>>
>
> I have used D and didn't claim that foreach isn't useful.
> What I said that is that it belongs in the library, NOT the language.
>

C++ was criticized for a long time for NOT having foreach in the 
language. Now they have 
http://www2.research.att.com/~bs/C++0xFAQ.html#for. Also people were so 
desperate to gave it that even this 
http://www.boost.org/doc/libs/1_49_0/doc/html/foreach.html was 
considered a nice addition to boost (and still part of it).

Obviously somehow you want to go into the opposite direction. Beats me.


-- 
Dmitry Olshansky