Iterators and Ranges: Comparing C++ to D to Rust

[Paulo Pinto]

On Wednesday, 16 June 2021 at 07:47:18 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grostad 
wrote:
> On Tuesday, 15 June 2021 at 16:21:07 UTC, Petar Kirov 
> [ZombineDev] wrote:
>> [...]
>
> This trend has been true since the 1980s where people wrote key 
> routines in assembly. Meaning, most projects aim for usable at 
> lowest price. More capable computers means less efficient 
> programming...
>
> I think a better argument is that system level programming 
> requires predictable latency and high effiency to a greater 
> extent.
>
> For instance, if I create a solar powered monitoring system 
> then I want to use a low powered cpu.
>
> Walter says D is for systems programming. Well, then it follows 
> that everything in the standard library should be designed for 
> that purpose.
>
> Meaning: predictable latency and highest efficiency, either by 
> being fast OR consume minimal resources (energy or RAM).
>
> If D does not follow through on that then it cannot be 
> considered to be a dedicated system level language. But then D 
> needs to define what it is for.

Ironically Oberon, TinyGo, microEJ and .NET Nanoframework, Meadow 
fullfil that use case, while everyone keeps arguing what is D's 
killer use case.

Assuming you are happy with an ARM Cortex M0 class or Arduino 
like device.