Enough D to Make a Living?

[Ola Fosheim Grøstad via Digitalmars-d]

On Wednesday, 22 February 2017 at 09:09:45 UTC, Russel Winder 
wrote:
> is also proven. However there is a caveat, that the new 
> language must
> have a new computational model or at least a significant 
> breaking
> change in something associated with the computational model.

This is probably quite true, of course the more you get used to a 
particular model the more you feel that other languages are 
restraining your ability to express yourself...

> Learning C++, then D, then Rust for example will have benefit 
> because
> there are new things there even though the core computational 
> model is
> effectively the same – they have differences that matter.

Maybe. I think "modern" C++ is a in class of it's own at this 
point. It is now quite detached from it's root: C with classes. 
Not so much for the computational model as for all the patterns 
you ought to follow and not nearly enough constraints from the 
compiler on what you should not do. With modern C++ you either 
have to go for being proficient or end up feeling miserable. 
Which is quite different from most imperative languages I think.

Other than C++ I think most imperative Algol-like languages are 
in the same mold. The core difference is between system 
programming that requires hardware knowledge, but then the model 
is the hardware and not really the language. If you know 2-3 of 
them (e.g. C, TypeScript, Java) then getting into the others 
don't really require all that much.