A Few thoughts on C, C++, and D

[Ola Fosheim Grøstad via Digitalmars-d]

On Tuesday, 30 May 2017 at 07:56:43 UTC, Wulfklaue wrote:
> Its been my firm believe that lose packages are a detriment to 
> a language.

It isn't good if many of the interesting packages are 
unmaintained, as it gives an sense of being in the past.

> Half baked solutions are no solutions. Packages need to be part 
> of the language standard or "extended" library.

Standard libraries should stay small as they are hard to 
deprecate. Have official lists instead.

> One can simply look at Go. 100.000 packages, 98% are junk, 
> unfinished, not maintained, etc. And people are forced to dive 
> into the junk to find the good ones. Its the same with other 
> languages and there unenforced third party packages.

There is a solution for this: "awesome lists"

https://github.com/avelino/awesome-go

The problem for a small language is more when a very useful 
library become unmaintained, then people wonder why not somebody 
else took over.