D - Unsafe and doomed

[Paulo Pinto]

On 04.01.2014 03:39, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
> On Saturday, 4 January 2014 at 02:09:51 UTC, NoUseForAName wrote:
>> .. includes a pretty damning assessment of D as "unsafe" (compared to
>> Rust) and generally doomed.
>
> I'd say the author is simply wrong about the doomed thing, the link he
> cites doesn't make a convincing case, and is many years old anyway.
>
> As for the safety thing, I partially agree. The concepts Rust has are
> potentially very useful when working without the garbage collector. If
> you can use the gc, it obviates much of it (the owner of all items is
> the gc and they have an infinite lifetime, so tracking those things is
> trivial), but writing a kernel is one place where you probably don't
> want to use it, so that makes sense.
>
> It is possible to use the Rust concepts in D, but you don't get as much
> help from the compiler. Still better than C, but the rust system is nice
> in this respect.
>
> but i hate the rust syntax lol

I love it except for the pointer sigils, but then again I use ML 
languages (Caml Light, OCaml, Haskell, F#), on and off, since 1996.

--
Paulo