D vs C++11

[Timon Gehr]

On 11/02/2012 10:53 PM, Walter Bright wrote:
> On 11/2/2012 2:33 PM, Jacob Carlborg wrote:
>> I said the gap is getting thinner, not that is gone. It got foreach,
>> some form
>> of CTFE, static assert, lambda to mention a few new features.
>
>
> No ranges. No purity. No immutability. No modules. No dynamic closures.
> No mixins. Little CTFE. No slicing. No delegates. No shared. No template
> symbolic arguments. No template string arguments. No alias this.

No static if. Limited forward references. No real function local 
aggregate types. No real nested classes. No local template 
instantiation. No nested functions. No value range propagation for 
implicit conversions. No built-in string support. No built-in unicode 
support. No template guards. No inout. No default-initialization. No 
return type deduction for non-lambdas. No generic lambdas. No type 
deduction for lambda parameter types. No super. Less powerful typeof 
that is called decltype. No is-expressions. No compile-time reflection. 
No thread-local by default. No UFCS. No tuple/sequence types. No 
sequence auto-expansion. No sane built-in array types. No tuple slicing. 
No .init/.min/.max/etc. No kind of static foreach. No new scopes 
introduced in case statements. No block statements in a for-loop 
initializer. No optional parentheses on function calls. No implicit 
reference types. No ^^ operator. No binary ! operator. No built-in 
complex number types. Less comparison operators. None of eg. 
bearophile's enhancement requests.

... in no particular order, afaik, and to name a few. :o)