Moving back to .NET

[Chris via Digitalmars-d]

On Friday, 25 September 2015 at 20:05:08 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grostad 
wrote:

> I don't understand what would make D iconclastic? The feature 
> set is quite ordinary c++ish, but there are some areas that 
> show that features have been added without enough work being 
> put into them before they were implemented. But OO is primarily 
> about modelling, it wasn't meant to be a low level programming 
> paradigm. Classes etc is just language features to support the 
> high level model and evolving it over time. Ths is where C++ 
> went wrong IMO.

"Iconoclastic" is a bit exaggerated, I know. But D makes people 
think, not just accept things, which is subversive. I've noticed 
that people prefer to accept things as is, which makes life 
easier. Hence the huge success of Java and C#. This is also the 
reason why people who use these languages are offended and get 
angry, when you point out flaws to them (as Jonathan said). It's 
like any belief system.

We are not talking about D as a language/tool here, we are 
talking about psychological factors. Go and Java got it right 
from a psychological point of view. They cater for people's need 
for guidance by not giving them options. But I don't think this 
is what D is all about. And that's why it is hard for people to 
grasp.

Btw, risk is not that big a factor anymore. D is mature enough. 
When IBM embraced Java, it was a huge boost for Java, but Java 
was still quite young and immature. If IBM embraced D, it would 
soon see IDEs and libraries, everything. But nobody embraces D.