You don't like GC? Do you?

[Adam Wilson]

On 10/11/18 11:20 PM, JN wrote:
> On Thursday, 11 October 2018 at 21:22:19 UTC, aberba wrote:
[snip]
> That is fine, if you want to position yourself as competition to 
> languages like Go, Java or C#. D wants to be a viable competition to 
> languages like C, C++ and Rust, as a result, there are usecases where GC 
> might not be enough.

Does it though? The way I see it is that people who want to do what 
C/C++ does are going to use ... C/C++. The same goes for Java/C#. People 
who want to do what Java/C# do are pretty much just going to use 
Java/C#. And nothing D does is going to convince them that D is truly 
better.

For the C/C++ D's more involved involved semantics for non-GC code are 
ALWAYS going to be a turnoff. And for Java/C# people D's less evolved 
standard library (and library ecosystem) is ALWAYS going to be a turnoff.

Where D shines is in it's balance between the two extremes. If want to 
attempt what C# can do with C++ i'm going to spend the next ten years 
writing code to replace what ships OOB in .NET. If I want to use C# as a 
systems language, I have to reinvent everything that C# relies on from 
the ground up, which will cost me about 10 years (see MSR's Singularity).

IMHO D should focus on being the best possible D it can be. If we take 
care of D, the rest will attend to itself.

-- 
Adam Wilson
IRC: LightBender
import quiet.dlang.dev;