DIP 1025--Dynamic Arrays Only Shrink, Never Grow--Community Review Round 1

Robert Schadek rschadek at symmetryinvestments.com
Tue Nov 12 09:12:51 UTC 2019

On Monday, 11 November 2019 at 22:28:05 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
> The idea is to be able to guarantee memory safety. I've spoken 
> about this in my presentations and DConf, and that's clearly 
> what DIP25 and DIP1000 were targeted at, and my proposals for 
> an Ownership/Borrowing system for D.
> This is where the industry is moving. Even C++ is heading that 
> direction:
> http://open-std.org/JTC1/SC22/WG21/docs/papers/2018/p1179r0.pdf
> This proposal is written by Herb Sutter, and is no joke.
> We either get on the bus or get run over by the bus.

golang is not going in that direction. They are not @safe but 
mostly because
they have chosen performance over safety.

To me D is great because it is not doing what everybody else is 
If D was only doing what c++ or rust are doing, D can only become 
good as those IMO. But D should be better.
Generative programming in combination with functional 
programming, is
awesome. Hardly anybody is doing that.
I'm not saying we should steal other peoples good ideas.
I'm trying to say we should steal interesting ideas/mistakes and 
improve on them.
For instance taking the c++ template meta-programming mistake and
making it a feature was a huge win.

Additionally, I think there is an elephant in the room. 
I just watched a talk on rust async/await.
It took them ~10 years to get the borrow-checker + multi 
threading thing
done/right, and compared to us they have infinite resources.
Is there a plan for D and the borrow-checker in place/planning?

More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list