Vision for the D language - stabilizing complexity?

[Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d]

On 7/9/2016 7:44 PM, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote:
> On Saturday, 9 July 2016 at 08:39:10 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
>> Seems that in order to make it useful, users had to extend it. This
>> doesn't fit the criteria.
>
> Scheme is a simple functional language which is easy to extend.

If they have to extend it, it isn't Scheme anymore. I bet you don't use 
Scheme, either.


>> Wirth's Pascal had the same problem. He invented an elegant, simple,
>> consistent, and useless language. The usable Pascal systems all had a
>> boatload of dirty, incompatible extensions.
>
> I am not sure if Pascal is elegant, but it most certainly is useful.

The original Pascal, which you said you'd never used. I have.


> So I don't think I agree with your definition of "useful".

Try and write a program in Wirth's Pascal that reads a character from 
the keyboard.


>> What programmers think of as "intuitive" is often a collection of
>> special cases.
> I think I would need examples to understand what you mean here.

Dangling else is a classic.

< > for template parameters in C++.

infix notation