Why I chose D over Ada and Eiffel

[Ramon]

On Wednesday, 21 August 2013 at 17:17:52 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
> On Wednesday, 21 August 2013 at 16:50:38 UTC, Ramon wrote:
>> I am *not* against keeping an eye on performance, by no means. 
>> Looking at Moore's law, however, and at the kind of computing 
>> power available nowadays even in smartphones, not to talk 
>> about 8 and 12 core PCs, I feel that the importance of 
>> performance is way overestimated (possibly following a 
>> formertimes justified tradition).
>>
>
> Moor's law is kaput, finish, niet, we don't know how to use the 
> extra transistor.

Even if that were true, we have gone quite some distance. Not 
even talking about Sparc T4 or 8-core X86, my smartphone is more 
powerful than what I had as computer 10 years or so ago.

> A vast amount of software is written in javascript, java, C#, 
> PHP and many "safe" languages, and still are crippled with bugs.

Do I get you right considering js, java, C# and PHP being "safe" 
languages?

> Some codebase are trully scary. Look at gdb's source code or 
> gtk's.

Written in C/C++ ...

> You want no bugs ? Go for Haskell. But you'll get no 
> convenience or performance. The good thing if that if it does 
> compile, you are pretty sure that it does the right thing.

Why should I? Isn't that what D promises, too (and probably is 
right)?

On another perspective: Consider this question "Would you be 
willing to have all your software (incl. OS) running 10% or even 
20% slower but without bugs, leaks, (unintended) backdoors and 
the like?"

My guess: Upwards of 80% would happily chime "YES!".