python vs d

[via Digitalmars-d]

On Wednesday, 30 April 2014 at 17:05:54 UTC, Russel Winder via 
Digitalmars-d wrote:
> I believe it is not that at all. Writing code using a dynamic 
> language
> is a totally different mind set to working with a static 
> language, even
> if many similar code idioms appear to be being used.

I kind of agree, but as you pointed out (with Go): no language is 
  really static, but a point in a design space.

You still get runtime errors.
You still get values out of bounds.
So both Python and D are on the same scale.

And they are both less "strict" than a functional language with 
heavy duty type constraints and formal proof mechanisms.

> The idioms of Go do not apply to D and C++.

I think the issues I am having with Go is that it hasn't quite 
found the idioms that work best yet. So libraries are a bit 
lacking in terms of usability IMO.

You can probably say the same about D, even though it draws 
heavily on C++. Perhaps drawing on C++ is holding it back too.

Time will show.

Ola.