Rust and D

[Peter Alexander]

On Saturday, 29 September 2012 at 10:27:26 UTC, Nick Sabalausky 
wrote:
> Problem is, that's irrelevant: The important point he's missing 
> is
> "If feature X is helpful, then why should I *bother* going
> without, when there are plenty of other languages (such as the 
> one I'm
> already using) that *do* provide me with that benefit?"
>
> He fails to even *try* to answer that and instead just 
> complains about
> complaining.

The answer to that question is obvious: you should bother going 
without because other languages provide other things that your 
pet language does not (e.g. channels + simplicity in this case).

Searching for a better language is a search like any other. 
Hill-climbing is a poor search heuristic. Sometimes you have to 
be willing to lose features to find the higher peaks.