Thoughts on Backward Compatibility

[Dom DiSc]

On Friday, 16 February 2024 at 04:38:03 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
> TBH, @nogc, dip1000, @live, etc., feel a lot like D trying to 
> go in entirely new directions.

I don't think so. Ok, @nogc is somewhat superfluous (as you 
better control the GC with explicit commands in the few places 
where this is necessary), but the rest plays well with @safe and 
pure and so on.

I would like D to be a better Rust (as I hate the Rust syntax and 
the struggle with the borrow checker in code that has really 
noching to do with memory safety).

What I miss most is @safe by default and working @properties (and 
type-properties: it always bugs me that with user defined 
properties you need to use myProperty!T instead of T.myProperty - 
mostly because I tend to always use the wrong systax. I even 
started to re-define the buildin properties with templates, just 
so that I can use them all the same way).