D1, D2 and the future of libraries

[Nick Sabalausky]

"Nick Sabalausky" <a at a.a> wrote in message 
news:jfi071$1dps$1 at digitalmars.com...
> "Stewart Gordon" <smjg_1998 at yahoo.com> wrote in message 
> news:jfh9bb$2v3$1 at digitalmars.com...
>> - What triggered you to switch?  For example, D2 just being there, signs 
>> that D2 is stabilising, the announcement of D1's forthcoming end, 
>> stumbling over a limitation of D1....
>>
>
> There were some killer features in D2 I was chomping at the bit for:
>
> - *Actual* constness (not even necessarily transitive const, although that 
> is nice. Just simply *having* real const/immutable *at all*).
>
> - String literals are dynamic arrays instead of static array. So no need 
> to be slicing them all the time. For instance, no more of this nonsense: 
> ["string1"[], "another string"]. 'Course, that's another related benefit: 
> Types of certain expressions determined by best common type instead of 
> "the exact type of the first item".
>
> - Traits. God, it's nice to have traits now. Killer feature for 
> metaprogramming.
>
> I think those were the main ones. There may have been more, but I've 
> gotten so used to D2 I can't remember what D1's limitations were anymore.
>

Oh, and ranges, of course (along with std.algorithm). That was another 
killer feature for me.