Andrei's list of barriers to D adoption

[Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d]

On 6/7/2016 12:40 AM, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote:
> On Tuesday, 7 June 2016 at 07:17:04 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
>> Granted, one can certainly have other reasons to prefer C++. But memory safety
>> isn't one of them.
> That's true, but memory safety isn't a big problem in C++ if one sticks to what
> one can do in @safe code.

Obviously, code that doesn't do unsafe things is safe.

I used to write programs that corrupted memory for years and years in C++. Over 
time, I gradually evolved practices that avoided those sorts of bugs, and now I 
rarely have a corrupted memory issue in my code.

It's not that C++ got any safer. All that old code will still compile and crash. 
It's that I got better, which should not be confused with the language getting 
better. I learned not to stick my fingers into the high voltage section of the 
power supply.

C++ still suffers from:

http://www.digitalmars.com/articles/b44.html

and probably always will.