Just where has this language gone wrong?

[Timon Gehr]

On 07/19/2012 04:21 PM, Petr Janda wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I'm an occasional lurker on the D forums just to see where the language
> is going,but I'm a little puzzled. In another thread I found this code
>
> auto r = [5, 3, 5, 6, 8].sort.uniq.map!(x => x.to!string);
>
> I don't understand whats going on here. Int array is getting sorted,
> then Uniqued, then what?

Then it is mapped to string representations, just as the code says.

> What type is x?

'int', if you like.

> What kind of operator is =>,

Lambda function. It is the same as (...){ return ...; }, just without 
the noise.

> why is x.to!string allowed template specialization should say
> x.to!(string),

Why should it say that?

> which leads me to think that there are multiple syntaxes
> for things

There always are 'multiple syntaxes for things' if writing code should
be productive and validating code for static correctness should be
decidable.

>(why I hate dynamic languages, love compiled)
>

This is unrelated to dynamic vs. compiled. (those two terms do not
contradict each other anyway.)

> On another note, (copied from wikipedia)
>
> foreach(item; set) {
> // do something to item
> }
>
> what's with the lax syntax being allowed?

s/lax/to the point/

> Shouldn't it be at least specified "auto item"?
>

Why on earth would that be the case?

> I'm sorry I don't mean to be a criticizer, but it seems to me that D is
> trying to be a dynamic-like compiled language way too hard.

It's just syntax. Eliminating syntax noise is fine. Code should look
like what it does.