[OT] What are D's values?

[Dukc]

On Thursday, 7 October 2021 at 22:07:13 UTC, Guillaume Piolat 
wrote:
> On Thursday, 7 October 2021 at 20:12:49 UTC, Dukc wrote:
>> Wow, are modern C++ compilers crashy *when compared to D*? I 
>> definitely agree that D compilers nowadays are more than 
>> stable enough for production, but do they really rival the 
>> most common C++ ones?
>
> LDC rivals clang of course. On what metric do you think it 
> wouldn't?

I was thinking about the frontend. Some C++ frontends are so 
widely used that I'd think they have less bugs.

OTOH C++ frontends are more complex to get right and they are not 
written in D (except DMC), so I would not except a C++ frontend 
of similar maturity to be as reliable. But something lice g++ is 
so incredibly common that it sounds like a bigger factor than the 
relative simplicity of D.

>
> Yes really, it is very difficult to keep up with the C++ 
> changes even if you were a full-time C++ programmer. And you 
> need to since people start to use the new stuff when available. 
> It is very likely that when the next standard comes out, you 
> would have barely assimilated the one from 10 years ago. C++ 
> needs a cast of "explainers" like Scott Meyers.

Ouch. They would do well to be more conservative and leave 
accumulating features for extensions and younger languages. They 
cannot match newer languages in elegance whatever they do, so 
it'd make more sense to make life easy for existing codebases 
instead.

But I'm probably missing something here. I don't think the C++ 
standard committee is stupid after all.