D vs Go in real life

[Bienlein]

>Go is on the list of languages that I'd like to spend more time 
>becoming familiar with, because I think that it's good to know 
>lots of programming languages, but the more I learn about it, 
>the less I like it. Its design philosophies are just too 
>different from my preferences.

Go IMHO is a modernized C and there is nothing in addition from
what I can see (except CSP). It is what turns out if someone
nowadays did something exactly like C with modern means.

>I rather use D than Go, but it has more to do with Go's 
>community with their religion decisions about generics, dynamic 
>loading,

I spent some time reading postings in the Go user forum. Go is
today what for us earlier was Basic or Pascal. Something very
exciting to get into all this stuff. People seem to be quite
religious about it in the sense that it feels holes of boredom in
your life by getting exciting about a programming language.

> You may want to look at scala then.

Then have a look at this thread in the Scala user forum:
https://groups.google.com/forum/?hl=de#!topic/scala-user/D9QDOnHSUu8
It is about build times in Scala not scaling up. One reply was
"Do you have very fast SSDs in your computer?". When I read that
I decided only to do a little spare time Scala project and that's
it. Might serve me to find a better Java job one day. D has
immutable objects and pure functions. I rather do D than Scala,
actually ...

Lightweight Threads in Go and Rust

What is a *BIG* plus for Go and Rust are lightweight threads. You
can spawn some thousand of them and it's no problem. I really
wished D had that kind of threads as well. For nowaydays
server-side development where applications need to bear heavy
load and load peaks this is an important thing.

-- Bienlein