Better branding of -betterC

[H. S. Teoh]

On Thu, Oct 29, 2020 at 02:28:58PM +0000, Mike Parker via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On Thursday, 29 October 2020 at 11:50:12 UTC, Dibyendu Majumdar wrote:
[...]
> > I was wondering if it worthwhile branding -betterC differently -
> > e.g.  use a brand such as 'micro-D' or some nicer name. That is,
> > give it a new identity that highlights that it not just better C  -
> > but a D version without GC.
> 
> I think it's a bad, bad, bad idea to put any emphasis on BetterC other
> than as a tool to help in porting C or C++ code to D, or to integrate
> D into existing C and C++ projects. I see too many people reaching for
> it first thing, probably out of a misguided GC phobia. D is the
> language we need to be promoting. BetterC was intended for a specific
> purpose. Beyond that, it's a crippled D. If some people prefer to use
> it that way, fine, but we shouldn't encourage it.

+1.

Most people with GC phobia don't actually need to avoid the GC. You
really only need to avoid the GC if you're working in very specific
niches, like hard real-time requirements (game engines, rocket booster
controllers, etc.).  Your general software project does not need to
avoid the GC; you just need to know how to use it effectively (and/or
apply @nogc where it matters).


T

-- 
Freedom of speech: the whole world has no right *not* to hear my spouting off!