Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why I Like D

aradaelli.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 134 posts

Re: Why I Like D

#31

Post by pyjarrett »

VHRanger wrote: post #20
WalterBright wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

D doesn't have evangelists or a marketing team. It's just people who find it really useful.

Quoted post unavailable.

> compile times, ugly syntax, ergonomics

This is why I write in Ada--it's C++98 with cleaner syntax and a bunch of nice/new features (array bounds, pre/post conditions, etc). It's package-based, so types do not "contain functions", so free functions, member function, who cares, it's all written and callable the same ways. There's even a real module system built in for decades with packages. You have to get over `begin` and `end` though.

Re: Why I Like D

#32

Post by LAC-Tech »

WalterBright wrote: post #5

BetterC got a lot of resistance at first, along the lines of who needs it. (BetterC is a subset of D that only relies on the C standard library.) But over time it has accumulated a lot of users, as being C without the troubles. We've gone a step further with ImportC, and now C code can be imported directly into the D compiler, which makes it easy to interface D code to your existing C base.

ImportC is a killer feature, IMHO. Makes the choice to use D quite an easy one for a lot of tasks.

But - it's not production ready yet, is it?

Re: Why I Like D

#33

Post by leetrout »

> Go did not have generic types at the time so I excluded it immediately

I wonder how many people are missing out on Go for a feature they wouldnt miss 80-90% of the time?

Re: Why I Like D

#34

Post by LAC-Tech »

zozbot234 wrote: post #26
VHRanger wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

Is it RESF, or is it Rust's unique feature of memory safety (and data race safety) without GC? D is a nice language to be sure, but it's going to have trouble matching these features. Of course, this is not meant as a criticism of D - other languages like Jai are practically in the same boat. The C++ folks are at least aware of the challenge, as is clear from the C++ Core Guidelines effort.

Rust definitely has a lot of merits. I was definitely following it, and excited by its release.

But you cannot deny the RESF was obnoxious. And pervasive. But ultimately successful - the people who voiced their dislike would get down-voted to oblivion.

Re: Why I Like D

#36

Post by 7thaccount »

WalterBright wrote: post #12
hypertele-Xii wrote: post #10

D makes a compelling promise, but it's still ongoing metamorphosis. Changes too rapidly for libraries to take root. Every time I look at it there's a "new, better way" of doing everything so all the tools and libraries are out of date, at all times. And the whole thing doesn't sound so clean and elegant anymore.

All languages (even C to some extent) that are in wide use evolve towards new and better ways, and obsolete old ways. I don't even recognize C++ anymore, and I wrote a frakkin compiler for it.

BSG fan Walter?

Re: Why I Like D

#37

Post by WalterBright »

leetrout wrote: post #33

> Go did not have generic types at the time so I excluded it immediately I wonder how many people are missing out on Go for a feature they wouldnt miss 80-90% of the time?

Generic code is written with D a lot more than I'd originally anticipated.

Re: Why I Like D

#38

Post by marcodiego »

According to wikipedia:

  "...was originally released under a custom license, qualifying as source available but not conforming to the open source definition. In 2014..."
Which has been a different path other more popular languages took to increase popularity. The standard D2, which is now D, introduced breaking changes and stabilization only came around 2010.

Parallel to this, other programming languages became more popular and evolved, particularly C++. This certainly affected D's "novelty value".

I wonder how much these facts negatively influenced D adoption.

Re: Why I Like D

#40

Post by christophilus »

leetrout wrote: post #33

> Go did not have generic types at the time so I excluded it immediately I wonder how many people are missing out on Go for a feature they wouldnt miss 80-90% of the time?

I’ll be honest. It kept me away from Go for far too long. Now, I really appreciate Go, and hope the new generics implementation doesn’t ruin the culture. I do wish Go had sum types, and that it didn’t have null. Those are my main gripes.
Post reply on HN