Is it time for D 3.0?

[krzaq]

On Sunday, 29 March 2020 at 00:19:57 UTC, NaN wrote:
> On Saturday, 28 March 2020 at 21:38:00 UTC, Denis Feklushkin 
> wrote:
>> On Saturday, 28 March 2020 at 19:50:44 UTC, NaN wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Dont design based on imaginings of the future, you will 
>>> almost always get it wrong.
>>
>> This is almost already reality, not future.
>
> I was responding to your statement regarding FPGAs. If they 
> become ubiquitous, and if people want to use D to program them, 
> and if someone does the work to make it happen, then maybe 
> different width basic types *might* be needed.
>
>
>> Just make survey around your friends/collegues about: what is 
>> a byte? Then compare with wikipedia/dictionary/RFC/etc 
>> definition. You will be very surprised.
>>
>> Already, it is difficult for a beginner to explain why the 
>> double is 64 bits. And if it is double from integer why 
>> integer is 32. I think it is no need to spend time by 
>> explaining whole IT history.
>
> I'm struggling to understand why anyone would find it either 
> hard to understand or difficult to explain...
>
> float is a 32 bit floating point number
> double is a 64 bit floating point number
>
> Lets be honest, if that is causing you problems then you 
> probably need to reconsider your career path.

It's not hard to understand. It's pointless memorization though, 
as those names and their binding to sizes are based on 
implementation details of processors from the *previous 
millenium*. Programming languages should aim to lower the 
cognitive load of their programmers, not the opposite.

To paraphrase your agument:
A mile is 1760 yards
A yard is 3 feet
A foot is 12 inches
What's so hard to understand? If that is causing you problems 
then you probably need to reconsider your career path.