D as A Better C?

[Daniel Murphy]

"Manu" <turkeyman at gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:mailman.20.1392172483.6445.digitalmars-d at puremagic.com...
On 12 February 2014 09:06, Mike <none at none.com> wrote:

On Tuesday, 11 February 2014 at 20:42:26 UTC, bearophile wrote:
Walter Bright:

(First off, I hate the name "better C", any suggestions?)

A different name is needed.

> > I don't think a different name is needed, nor do I think it would be a 
> > good idea.  All
> > that's needed are a few compiler switches to enable/disable features so 
> > D can be
> > used on more platforms.  GNU g++ does this without giving it a new name 
> > (e.g. -fno-
> > exceptions, -fno-rtti, etc...)  D can do the same without giving it a 
> > new name.
>
> +1, I support this approach. C/C++ programmers are familiar with it, and I 
> can
> imagine situations where I might want some features, but not others.

Having one switch does not prevent having finer-grained switches too.