Some questions on latest work

[Joakim via Digitalmars-d]

On Wednesday, 27 April 2016 at 18:38:17 UTC, Max Samukha wrote:
> On Tuesday, 26 April 2016 at 18:16:42 UTC, Joakim wrote:
>
>>
>> He gave very specific criticism, along with a code sample, 
>> then made a prediction, followed by suggesting another 
>> competing language that might do better.  None of that is the 
>> usual content-free fanboy "bashing."  There is nothing wrong 
>> with occasional criticism of the competition, as long as we 
>> don't overdo it, either in frequency or by exaggerating.
>
> No, judging a language by the appearance of its syntax *is* 
> fanboy bashing. BTW, some interesting points about Swift made 
> by a Rust designer http://graydon2.dreamwidth.org/5785.html.

Syntax matters.  Both for the ease of programmers reading it and, 
as we've seen with C++, the speed of the compiler.

I look at that code sample and I don't want to read code like 
that.  I have the same feeling when I see template-heavy C++ 
code.  It is one of the primary reasons I use D, because it reads 
very easily to me.

Is it just because I'm used to C-style code?  Is it purely 
aesthetic?  I don't know, but there is a difference.  Walter has 
talked about an aesthetic quality to D that he tries to optimize, 
and whatever it is, it comes through to me.

And whatever you may think of Suliman's and my opinion, I 
guarantee that Rust's syntax is one of the main reasons it will 
never take off, because most programmers have such preferences.  
The Rust designers may not care: they may have chosen the syntax 
that best suits their particular audience, just like Haskell, and 
they don't want it to become more popular.  But its syntax will 
limit it.