On C/C++ undefined behaviours

[retard]

Sat, 21 Aug 2010 18:31:16 -0700, Jonathan M Davis wrote:

> But still, being able to consistently match C++ at what it's good at and
> C# and Java at what they're good at in one language is big, and I really
> don't think that we're there yet. I don't know how efficient we are in
> comparison to C++, but I expect that there are a number of areas which
> need improvement (things like inlining, the garbage collector, etc.) if
> we want the average D program to match the average C++ program for
> efficiency. And we definitely don't match Java and C# for ease of use
> and maintainability at this point, but most of that is simply an issue
> of libraries and tools, both of which are being worked on. So, we're
> getting there, but I don't think that we're there yet. And certainly,
> once we do get there, there's no reason to stay only "on par" with them.
> We should always be looking to improve D and its libraries and tools.

Should D also look more academic than Haskell, F#, Scala, DDC, Clojure, 
BitC, Factor, and Ur/Web ?