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