D vs C++11

mist none at none.none
Fri Nov 2 19:27:19 PDT 2012


Regarding delegates - I think deal is that none of this C++ stuff 
can automatically capture local function context with delegate, 
so there are no _real_ delegates.

On Saturday, 3 November 2012 at 02:08:13 UTC, Mehrdad wrote:
> On Friday, 2 November 2012 at 21:53:06 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
>> On 11/2/2012 2:33 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
>>> I said the gap is getting thinner, not that is gone. It got 
>>> foreach, some form
>>> of CTFE, static assert, lambda to mention a few new features.
>
>
>> No ranges.
>
> Boost.Range
>
>
>> No purity.
>
> Yeah :(
>
>
>> No immutability.
>
> Hmm const objects do it sorta-kinda... ok maybe not lol
>
>
>> No modules.
>
> Apparently these are being considered for the next version!
>
>
>> No dynamic closures.
>
> Hmm? std::function works just fine with lambdas
>
>
>> No mixins.
>
> I don't _quite_ miss these ;)
>
>
>> Little CTFE.
>
> Yeah. :\
>
>
>> No slicing.
>
> You can sorta-kinda emulate these with iterators.
>
> On the plus side, there's no ambiguity as to value vs. 
> reference semantics in C++.
>
>
>> No delegates.
>
> std::function?
>
>
>> No shared.
>
> I don't think many people find themselves using shared in D 
> unfortunately.
>
>
>> No template symbolic arguments.
>
> I'm not sure I know what this is referring to. Do you mean 
> aliases?
>
>
>> No template string arguments.
>
> Ah I really miss this in C++...
>
>
>> No alias this.
>
> While alias this is nice, I don't seem to need it as often in 
> C++ as you'd imagine.
>
> It would come in handy sometimes, to be sure, but it's not a 
> deal breaker IMO.




More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list