Social media

[Paulo Pinto]

On Sunday, 14 June 2020 at 12:17:58 UTC, JN wrote:
> On Sunday, 14 June 2020 at 01:25:46 UTC, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
>> On Sunday, 14 June 2020 at 00:47:08 UTC, Avrina wrote:
>>> *systems* programming
>>
>> See, this is another thing I wish we'd avoid. I prefer to call 
>> D "general purpose" (or maybe "all purpose") and avoid the 
>> poorly-defined "systems" label anyway. It more accurately 
>> describes D in the real world.
>
> Go was in a similar spot several years ago. They first used the 
> systems programming language in their marketing, but then 
> people criticized them for having a GC. So they pivoted towards 
> "systems as in web servers and stuff, not like operating 
> systems".

Yet companies like F-Secure have a different opinion on that 
regard,

https://labs.f-secure.com/blog/tamago/

https://www.f-secure.com/en/consulting/foundry/usb-armory

I bet the D community would enjoy that USB Armory used bare metal 
D instead of Go.

Or that Google wouldn't be writing firmware in Go, regardless of 
what people consider systems programming to be, 
https://www.usenix.org/system/files/conference/atc15/atc15-paper-minnich.pdf

This is what D sometimes misses, don't try to please everyone, 
just keep charging despite the voices that tell that due to 
feature X it isn't applicable in domain Y and then changing the 
boat mid-course to please those voices.