Could D be used by Jonathan Blow rather jai language?
bcarneal at gmail.com
Sat Nov 21 01:52:36 UTC 2020
On Friday, 20 November 2020 at 16:12:35 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad
> On Friday, 20 November 2020 at 15:53:42 UTC, Bruce Carneal
>> Constraints are key. The question is when they are applied
>> and by whom. Does the language designer choose the
>> constraints ahead of time or does the programmer opt-in/out of
>> full capability at need?
> The challenge is that opt-in/out is a source of serious bugs.
> Also very difficult to prove that the overall system is sound
> if you have many options that you can turn on/off.
The challenge is to provide as much readily accessible power as
you can safely and correctly. It is a language design error to
promise something that you can not check automatically/correctly
in the compiler. If a language has such errors it needs an
I also consider it an language design error to have defaulted to
unsafe modes. Things should default to safe/correct with opt-out
capability to fast/dangerous. (I support @safe as default, for
example, just not the extern(C) == safe nonsense)
> Another problem is that even if you can make it work for single
> threaded it might break down when you add concurrency, for
> instance, you can create a parallel high level language that
> provably cannot deadlock. With low level multi-threading that
> is basically off the table.
If "it", whatever that is, precludes safe parallelism in
libraries or language extensions then "it" should be removed from
Again, defaults really matter here. If the right way is the
default way then leaving the "wrong" way escape hatch costs less,
in my view, than forcing two or more languages.
More information about the Digitalmars-d