Rust and D

[Thiez]

On Saturday, 29 September 2012 at 10:53:57 UTC, Peter Alexander 
wrote:
> So, with this in mind, do you think these hypothetical people 
> are all justified?
>
> (a) [Go programmer]: D is rubbish because it doesn't have 
> channels.
> (b) [Lisp programmer]: D is rubbish because it doesn't have 
> homoiconicity.
> (c) [Haskell programmer]: D is rubbish because it doesn't have 
> full type inference.

Would you agree D would be better if it had those features?

How about we rephrase to something less inflammatory:
  [Go programmer]: I prefer not to use D because it doesn't have 
channels.
  [Lisp programmer]: I prefer not to use D because it doesn't have 
homoiconicity.
  [Haskell programer]: I prefer not to use D because it doesn't 
have full type inference.

Suddenly they all seem like perfectly acceptable arguments. If a 
person really likes/needs a certain language feature, then surely 
that is a good reason to reject a language that does not have 
this feature?

Many people like generics. Go doesn't have them. So why get angry 
if these people reject Go?