python vs d

[John Colvin via Digitalmars-d]

On Monday, 28 April 2014 at 18:18:25 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad 
wrote:
> On Monday, 28 April 2014 at 18:07:45 UTC, John Colvin wrote:
>> What features does python, as a language (syntactical 
>> preferences aside), actually have to recommend it over D 
>> (assuming drepl* or similar became full-featured)?
>
> Libraries.
not part of the language (unless you count the standard library. 
I don't see anything particularly special about python's standard 
library).

> For closures for arrays and dicts.
I don't understand

> Tuples.
std.meta is on it's way, possibly with some small language 
improvements. It's surprising how much python-style tuple code 
you can do in D already, but the syntax is a little lacking. 
(e.g. `int a, b, c; std.typetuple.TypeTuple!(a, c, b) = 
std.typecons.tuple(2, 3, 7).expand;`)

> Heavy duty reflection and runtime dynamics.
Agreed. However, a lot of this is obviated by the compile-time 
abilities of D. Perhaps I'm just not that imaginative with my 
runtime introspections.

> (Runtime extensible classes.)
I don't imagine this being difficult to do as a library type with 
opDispatch. This would be an interesting little project.

> (Runtime integration of python and templates.)
I presume you mean web templates? This is a strong point in 
favour of an interpreted language, although the compile-time 
approach in vibe.d is powerful. As long as the code doesn't 
change too often, you can always recompile it and load as a 
shared library (I believe this is being looked at by vibe.d 
developers).

> System support (app engine, etc).
Not part of the language

> Lots of how-to-stuff on the web.
Ditto