A Perspective on D from game industry

[Paulo Pinto via Digitalmars-d]

On Thursday, 19 June 2014 at 13:52:12 UTC, Kagamin wrote:
> On Wednesday, 18 June 2014 at 19:08:17 UTC, c0de517e wrote:
>> Exactly. When I write that engineers have to understand how 
>> market works it's not that I don't understand what's 
>> technically good and bad, but that's not how things become 
>> successful. And there's nothing wrong with the fact that soft 
>> factors matter more than technical perfection, at all, because 
>> we make machines and programs for people, not to look at how 
>> pretty they seem.
>
> And technologies should be for machines and for people, but C++ 
> is not for machines and not for people, it's only for 
> compatibility with itself. BTW, modules break the 
> compatibility, which makes it impossible to migrate to them, 
> because then you would throw away or rewrite all your codebase, 
> and that still doesn't guarantee the result will fly; that 
> said, they destroy the whole reason of existence of C++.

Modules are still being discussed. Besides the prototype 
implementation in LLVM, there are other proposals being discussed.

There will be a meeting in a few weeks time about existing 
proposals.

As for the reason of existence of C++, I think it is still very 
valuable.

Only recently have OS and compiler vendors started to move from C 
to C++. How long will take for them to move from C++ to something 
else like D?

--
Paulo