D

[Tony]

Reading the D feature list and "value propositions", I find much to my own 
way of thinking (and wonder if any of my own issues found there way into D's 
requirement list) as to what would be a great language. Right now, I'm not 
developing software. Well OK, I am, but not "real" software: I am developing 
software to develop software with! Naturally, this leads one to examine 
development tools, such as languages.

When I went to college, there was a BIG push to indoctrinate undergrads with 
PASCAL. When I got into an industry (engineering, not IT), there was that 
same push: the schools and companies were collaborating toward the PASCAL 
goal. PASCAL "did well" (Umm... for Borland?). I knew a FORTRAN a bit and 
did "minor" stuff with that (fixed ("refactored") existing code mostly, but 
wrote complete programs also) and quickly found C (eureka!). Tthis was circa 
IBM AT. The technology beyond my responsibility or capability but within the 
environment was recommissioned PDP-11s running CP/M recommissioned for 
realtime machine control (No, I never programmed those relics, though I 
rebooted them from time to time).

For me, C came in the flavor of Microsoft C and I still have The Waite 
Group's books next to me on my bookshelf, though I've not opened them in 
over a decade. (My "stacks" are in the basement in banker's boxes, but I 
know what I have down there). What WERE those "PASCAL pushers" thinking?! I 
think back to the maintainer (yes, there was just one) of all that 
mission-critical (potentially industry pivotal) FORTRAN code ... such sad 
lives software developers have. Those many many lines of FORTRAN were pretty 
much the work of one engineer (not all the the embedded theory of course, 
though he knew it intimately also, but the code). Not a "programmer" or an 
"IT person", an engineer (no, not a sofware engineer! Think, physics, 
runge-kutta, flame fronts and the theory of chaos, (OK, maybe not that last 
one, but he was old)). But I digress...

The gist of my post, well not really a gist, but for lack of having to use 
more human processing power than necessary (aka, my brain) right now (read, 
'gist' will do), I find it odd that a product having a lot of the same goals 
as the one I envision, is not one that I choose to use and that I search for 
another. (So much for the importance of "requirements specification" 
apparently?).

I did't have a question in starting this post, but having just gone through 
the harkening back (above) and back to reality now, I feel deja vu: C++ is 
now my FORTRAN, D is my PASCAL and my envisioned language is my C. I didn't 
put a question mark in there because I think that I have figured out my 
frustration with the current state of things. (Also, I'm so happy I'm not 
still a FORTRAN programmer! :) )

Is D today's PASCAL?

Tony