LinkedIn Article to be: Why you need to start moving off C/C++ to D, now.

[Chris via Digitalmars-d]

On Thursday, 17 July 2014 at 09:52:45 UTC, eles wrote:
> On Thursday, 17 July 2014 at 09:32:15 UTC, Chris wrote:
>> On Thursday, 17 July 2014 at 08:56:40 UTC, Chris wrote:
>>>
>>> The funny thing about C++ is that there is a plethora of 
>>> books that teach you how to do it right, which is a sign that 
>>> there is something inherently wrong with the language*. I 
>>> find that in D there aren't many ways to *really* do it 
>>> wrong, but still you have the freedom to try different 
>>> approaches. D is not overly prescriptive, but often keeps you 
>>> from shooting yourself in the foot (or blow away your whole 
>>> leg**) What can happen in D is that you don't use the most 
>>> efficient way of doing something, it will make your program 
>>> slower, but it won't blow away your legs, arms or head, and 
>>> you can easily fix it later, if needs be.
>>>
>>>
>>> * And also a sign that there is a huge industry behind it, 
>>> and, of course, people who make a living being C++ gurus 
>>> don't want the language to slowly disappear. C++ reminds me a 
>>> little bit of religion: high priests, mysteries, dogmata ...
>>>
>>> ** "C makes it easy to shoot yourself in the foot. C++ makes 
>>> it harder, but when you do, it blows away your whole leg."
>>> – Bjarne Stroustrup
>>
>> Also, if the trend in C++ is to go back to functional 
>> programming (don't use classes, inheritance etc.), then what's 
>> the point? Why not use C instead. It's kinda absurd.
>
> For templates, stronger type checking, larger standard library 
> and, sometimes, the dreaded try{}.

Then why not create C+++ that keeps these useful features and get 
rid of all the dangerous crap people have stopped using / are 
discouraged from using?