Why D is not popular enough?
Seb via Digitalmars-d
digitalmars-d at puremagic.com
Thu Sep 1 10:10:00 PDT 2016
On Thursday, 1 September 2016 at 12:04:51 UTC, qznc wrote:
> On Thursday, 1 September 2016 at 08:04:00 UTC, Bienlein wrote:
>> D has a lot to offer with regard to functional programming. It
>> has pure functions and true immutable classes (true = also sub
>> objects become immutable), which Scala all doesn't have
>> (because of restrictions of the JVM). Does D have tail call
>> recursion optimization? I don't know, actually. If D had that
>> and pattern matching, it would beat Scala with all it's hype
>> by a big leap.
> D does not guarantee tail calls, but the compiler might
> sometimes decide to do it. Functional programmer usually want
> to guarantee, so they don't have to write a loop. The downside
> of TCO is that the stack trace is missing frames, which can be
> very confusing.
There's a DIP about adding a TCO attribute/pragma:
FYI: There's some discussion about it's benefit in comparison to
functional language D does have loops and it's a lot easier to
write and read them.
If you want to chime in, please do so at the PR discussion.
> D has no syntax for pattern matching, but some library support:
Yep it's pretty easy to do within library code, if you use an
object chain you might also want to have a look at castSwitch.
More information about the Digitalmars-d