D vs C++11

[Timon Gehr]

On 11/03/2012 08:19 AM, Paulo Pinto wrote:
> On Friday, 2 November 2012 at 23:08:00 UTC, Timon Gehr wrote:
>> On 11/02/2012 10:53 PM, 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. No purity. No immutability. No modules. No dynamic closures.
>>> No mixins. Little CTFE. No slicing. No delegates. No shared. No template
>>> symbolic arguments. No template string arguments. No alias this.
>>
>> No static if. Limited forward references. No real function local
>> aggregate types. No real nested classes. No local template
>> instantiation. No nested functions. No value range propagation for
>> implicit conversions. No built-in string support. No built-in unicode
>> support. No template guards. No inout. No default-initialization. No
>> return type deduction for non-lambdas. No generic lambdas. No type
>> deduction for lambda parameter types. No super. Less powerful typeof
>> that is called decltype. No is-expressions. No compile-time
>> reflection. No thread-local by default. No UFCS. No tuple/sequence
>> types. No sequence auto-expansion. No sane built-in array types. No
>> tuple slicing. No .init/.min/.max/etc. No kind of static foreach. No
>> new scopes introduced in case statements. No block statements in a
>> for-loop initializer. No optional parentheses on function calls. No
>> implicit reference types. No ^^ operator. No binary ! operator. No
>> built-in complex number types. Less comparison operators. None of eg.
>> bearophile's enhancement requests.
>>
>> ... in no particular order, afaik, and to name a few. :o)
>
> What I have learned in all my years of enterprise development is that
> all those features have zero value for business.
>
> Languages get adopted because of business value, not due to the coolness
> of their feature set, how boring it may sell.
>
> If we want to sell D to companies using C++ for years, slowly migrating
> to JVM, .NET worlds, or just updating their codebases to C++11, then we
> need to sell D's business value not feature lists.
>

Maybe you misunderstood. I am not trying to make D look good. The point 
of the post was to show that C++11 and D are quite different languages. 
Walter's list was rather short.