What can you "new"

[Steven Schveighoffer]

On Thu, 26 Mar 2009 16:33:09 -0400, Andrei Alexandrescu  
<SeeWebsiteForEmail at erdani.org> wrote:

> Don wrote:
>> Cristian Vlasceanu wrote:
>>> Hm... how should I put it nicely... wait, I guess I can't: if you guys  
>>> think D is a systems language, you are smelling your own farts!
>>>
>>> Because 1) GC magic and deterministic system level behavior are not  
>>> exactly good friends, and 2) YOU DO NOT HAVE A SYSTEMS PROBLEM TO  
>>> SOLVE. C was invented to write an OS in a portable fashion. Now that's  
>>> a systems language. Unless you are designing the next uber OS, D is a  
>>> solution in search of a problem, ergo not a systems language (sorry  
>>> Walter). It is a great application language though, and if people  
>>> really need custom allocation schemes, then they can write that part  
>>> in C/C++ or even assembler (and I guess you can provide a custom  
>>> run-time too, if you really DO HAVE a systems problem to address --  
>>> like developing for an embedded platform).
>>  You're equating "systems language" with "language intended for writing  
>> a complete operating system". That's not what's intended.
>> AFAIK there are no operating systems written solely in C++.
>> Probably, D being a "systems language" actually means "D is competing  
>> with C++".
>
> I'm surprised at how many people misunderstand the "systems language" or  
> "systems-level programming" terms. Only a couple of months ago, a good  
> friend whom I thought would know a lot better, mentioned that he thought  
> a "systems-level language" is one that can be used to build large  
> systems.

wikipedia to the rescue!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/System_programming_language
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/System_software

-Steve