Rant after trying Rust a bit

[rsw0x via Digitalmars-d]

On Wednesday, 5 August 2015 at 04:10:22 UTC, Jonathan M Davis 
wrote:
> On Tuesday, 4 August 2015 at 22:42:50 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad 
> wrote:
>> On Tuesday, 4 August 2015 at 20:47:00 UTC, Jonathan M Davis 
>> wrote:
>>> [...]
>>
>> What do you dislike about C++ coverage tooling in comparison 
>> with D's?
>
> To get code coverage in C++, I'd have to go track down a tool 
> to do it. There is none which is used as part of our normal 
> build process at work. As it is, we only have unit tests 
> because I went and added what was needed to write them and have 
> been writing them. No one else has been writing them, and if I 
> want any kind of code coverage stuff set up, I'd have to go 
> spend the time to figure it out. With D, it's all built-in, and 
> I don't have to figure out which tools to use or write any of 
> them myself - either for unit testing or code coverage. They're 
> just there and ready to go.
>
> - Jonathan M Davis

This is nonsense, what major C++ compiler doesn't provide code 
coverage?

I feel like 99% of C++ vs D arguments on this forum are comparing 
C++98 to D.