My choice to pick Go over D ( and Rust ), mostly non-technical

Walter Bright newshound2 at digitalmars.com
Mon Feb 5 20:12:09 UTC 2018


On 2/5/2018 12:06 AM, Boris-Barboris wrote:
> I think that would be most logical thing to have, but that would also imply 
> preprocessor, or at least it's restricted subset, wich you most probably though 
> about as well.

Sure. I could use the Boost licensed preprocessor in DMC, or the Boost licensed 
preprocessor in Warp.


>> D has a pretty good chunk of those already built in. The others don't come up 
>> very often, and can be done using D's inline assembler.
> 
> I have no doubt it can be done in the end. I solely imply that the disadvantage 
> here is that in C's "main" (imo) use case it has to be done, and that is a thing 
> to be concerned about when picking a language.

Most of those gcc builtin's I've never heard of, and I've been programming C for 
35 years now. I've also never had a use for them. I find it hard to believe that 
list would be a deal breaker, especially since much of it seems to be a 
replacement for the inline assembler, and D has a nice inline assembler.

This is called "checklisting". One lists the features of X culled from the 
documentation, and then compares it with Y. Inevitably, Y is found wanting. The 
checklist is never taken from the features of Y, because then X would be wanting :-)

This can be done with virtually any X and Y.

(Also, the builtins are extensions, and are hardly reliably available in any 
random Standard-conforming C compiler.)


More information about the Digitalmars-d mailing list