D dropped in favour of C# for PSP emulator

[SomeDude]

On Friday, 11 May 2012 at 21:55:37 UTC, akaz wrote:
>> What started out as C with classes started acquiring this 
>> feature and
>> that feature until the whole thing is just a haphazard heap of
>> misfitting self-contradictory pieces, which requires an 
>> enormous amount
>> of essentially-arbitrary rules just to clarify something as 
>> simple as,
>> for example, automatic type conversions.
>
> Partially, this also can be told about D, too. It started as a 
> cleaner C++ (I think) and grew up a bit complicated.
>
> Before arguing the contrary, please remember that C++ looks not 
> complicated to Stroustrup.
>
> Maybe simply addressing the most bitter drawbacks and 
> inconsistencies of C++ (and when I say that, I say notably 
> syntax stupidities, *then* conceptual stupidities) was enough 
> for, let's say, D_v1. Then, more, for D_v2. Maybe trying to 
> address too much at once?
>
> My feeling (I tried to port and work something in D) is that it 
> is a good language. But a complicate one and the learning time 
> tends to be limited today.
>
> C caught in the first place for its simplicity. Java, too 
> ("hey, no pointers!"). Annotations and other hell were added 
> later, *after* the naguage got assimilated. C# too ("hey! C++ 
> made *simpler*!"). Then it was C#2, 3, 4 etc. True, C++ grew up 
> a complicated beast, but *gradually*. At the beginning, it was 
> not.
>
> D does not have that gradualism in growing complicated. Not for 
> its developers, but for its (mass) users.

There is no arguing that D is a big and complex language. If it
wasn't, there wouldn't be huge discussions here about
interactions between features. It's complex because there is so
many new concepts to assimilate for newcomers from other
languages. The former Java programmers will have to face advanced
concepts coming from C++, the former C++ programmers will learn
to master concepts coming from Python and functional languages,
and former Python programmers will have to face lots of hurdles
associated to static languages. So basically, everyone has a
different learning curve.
I believe it takes no less than a year of full time programming
to become a proficient C++ programmer (by proficient, I mean a
programmer who doesn't fall in all the traps that the language
offers, and therefore spends more time coding than debugging). I
can't tell for D, I believe D is a net gain for C++ programmers,
but still a big investment.