Ideal D GUI Toolkit

[Paulo Pinto]

On Tuesday, 21 May 2013 at 06:39:39 UTC, Peter Williams wrote:
> On 21/05/13 16:21, Brad Roberts wrote:
>> On 5/20/13 9:49 PM, Peter Williams wrote:
>>>
>>> Yes, if D aspires to be a systems programming language it 
>>> can't keep
>>> relying on wrappers around C/C++ libraries (especially C++).  
>>> In the
>>> long term, it should be D all the way down to the OS API.
>>
>> You wrote this as if not using c and c++ libraries is a 
>> predicate for
>> being a systems language.  It's not.
>
> It is for me. I also won't count D as a systems language until 
> DMD is implemented in D.
>
>>
>> What's with the D community's (yes, I'm over generalizing some)
>> not-invented-here syndrome?  Avoiding the incredible body of 
>> existing
>> code out there that's accumulated over the decades is 
>> foolhardy and
>> narrow sighted.
>
> I did say "in the long term".
>
>> Are all c and c++ libraries great bodies of code,
>> absolutely not.
>
> I am not a fan of C++ (and don't really trust C++ libraries).  
> I went to C++ from Modula-2 due to job constraints but 
> eventually ditched it and moved on to C - yes, I went from C++ 
> to C.  The main reasons were that I felt C++ caused more 
> problems than it cured.  Plain C is a perfectly good language 
> for OOP as GTK+ demonstrates and there's no need for all the 
> complexity that comes with C++.
>

I went from Turbo Pascal to C++, with a very short stop on C.

Security exploits by design? No thanks. C++ might still have the 
C security quicksand underneath, but at the same time it offers 
more secure constructs.

Of course the best way would be to drop C and C++ altogether, but 
it will take a few decades I would say.

--
Paulo