RFC in Comparison between Rust, D and Go

rsw0x via Digitalmars-d digitalmars-d at puremagic.com
Mon Nov 9 15:15:22 PST 2015

On Monday, 9 November 2015 at 23:11:34 UTC, Vladimir Panteleev 
> On Monday, 9 November 2015 at 21:01:29 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu 
> wrote:
>> On 11/09/2015 09:13 AM, Nordlöw wrote:
>>> Yet another shallow language comparison that needs to be 
>>> corrected:
>>> https://www.quora.com/Which-language-has-the-brightest-future-in-replacement-of-C-between-D-Go-and-Rust-And-Why/answer/Matej-%C4%BDach?srid=itC4&share=1
>> My response: https://goo.gl/VTEYFk -- Andrei
> Great post, though languages that compile to C (e.g. Nim) are 
> probably even better at interfacing with C/C++ than D. I'm sure 
> D is #1 aside those though.

IMO D gets a plus here for being so C-like which makes 
interfacing with C a more enjoyable experience. It's very easy to 
write D in an "improved C" way.

More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list