D - Unsafe and doomed

Peter Alexander peter.alexander.au at gmail.com
Sat Jan 4 04:51:21 PST 2014


> The biggest disadvantage of D compared to Rust is that it does 
> not have the kind of safety perspective that Rust does, and in 
> particular does not provide safe constructs for concurrency.

Pretty sure immutable, purity, and thread-local statics are all 
safe constructs for concurrency; not to mention all the library 
features.

Rust probably is safer by some metric, but all those pointer 
types add considerable complexity.


> The other argument against using D is that it has been around 
> more than 10 years now, without much adoption and appears to be 
> more likely on its way out rather than increasing popularity.

This is just false. Any metric you look at suggests D use is on 
the increase, and certainly starting to get more commercial 
interest.

It's worth noting that many languages take a long time before 
they blossom. It took Ruby 10 years before Rails appeared.


More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list