Moving back to .NET

[Ola Fosheim Grøstad via Digitalmars-d]

On Wednesday, 23 September 2015 at 09:44:10 UTC, Chris wrote:
> Yes, it's hard to beat experience. However, if a feature - 
> albeit useful - would break too much code, Walter takes a 
> conservative stance, else D would lose most of its clients. We 
> need a proper transition strategy.

C++ seems to take a guideline + guideline support library (GSL) 
in order to "softly deprecate" the old feature set without 
actually deprecating it. I am not sure how well that goes, but 
GSL looks good to me.

When a language reach a certain complexity it probably is a 
mistake to add more features, new features have to be followed by 
instruction of how to make good use of them. In C++ there are too 
many ways to do the same thing, which is negative for code 
legibility.

His talk is online:

https://youtu.be/1OEu9C51K2A

> The question is, do certain issues really keep you from using 
> the language successfully and why? And is it an issue for a 
> substantial part of other users?

Another question is: what kind of competing solutions are 
emerging. Herb Sutter seems to have focused his cppcon talk on 
Rust style memory management in C++. The adoption of Rust does 
force the C++ designers to switch gears and hopefully the 
competition will create a push for better solutions.

That applies to D too, I think.

Rust also aims for commercial level stability for Rust 1.4. (I 
don't think they will be able to, but let's see.) This is also a 
threat for C++.