Please Vote: Exercises in TDPL?

[Georg Wrede]

Sean Kelly wrote:
> == Quote from Georg Wrede (georg.wrede at iki.fi)'s article
>> Well, anyhow, reading a couple fo Scott Meyers books really kills the
>> last inch of even trying to start coping with C++. They really make you
>> see what a piece of manure the language is. Without even trying.
> 
> I have a lot of issues with C++, but I find C to be positively maddening.
> If there were a version of D that didn't contain a GC and ran on SPARC
> I'd jump for joy right about now.

Amen, brother!!!

Such a version of D could (would?) take a remarkable slice of embedded 
programming, in no time at all!

Most people I know, who program single board systems, curse C, swear 
(and don't use) C++, and could kill for something that gave them K&R 1.0 
worth of a language, with the ease of D (or Pascal, but with the metal 
feel of C).

Walter has said that D will never be less than 32 bit, but many of these 
guys still program 16 or 8 bit CPUs. (And 8 and 16 bits won't go away 
anytime soon, either. There are gadgets smaller than mobile phones, in 
the future, too.)

Without GC, one might even dream it's possible to write D syntax, and 
target smaller than the x86 processor.


Many of these guys are hardware gurus, and only superficially study 
programming, or a specific programming language. They're smart, so the 
programming is not an issue, but the less they have to think about /how/ 
to express themselves and avoid stupid bugs, the better the code, and 
the more they have time to design the overall functionality and 
usability of the gadget.