D vs Go in real life

[Daniel Davidson]

On Wednesday, 6 November 2013 at 08:22:36 UTC, Bienlein wrote:

> 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 ...
>

Do you really make heavy use of immutable objects and pure 
functions and get benefit from it? I've been trying for quite a 
while and there are many many impediments. The fact that 
const/immutable and postblits don't mix is a big issue. The fact 
that many functions in the library are not pure that you might 
want to use in a pure context (.dup, text with doubles, etc) 
reduces pure's value in a viral manner. Hopefully there will be a 
solution for const/immutable members with mutable aliasing in 
structs. Hopefully what should be pure in the libraries will be 
made pure. Hopefully the inference of purity in functions like 
chain will improve. But when you describe immutable and purity as 
a plus, are you describing the idea of its use as positive (which 
I agree is) or the actual use of it (which I think needs work)?