this post was submitted on 18 Jan 2024
29 points (89.2% liked)

Programming

16864 readers
41 users here now

Welcome to the main community in programming.dev! Feel free to post anything relating to programming here!

Cross posting is strongly encouraged in the instance. If you feel your post or another person's post makes sense in another community cross post into it.

Hope you enjoy the instance!

Rules

Rules

  • Follow the programming.dev instance rules
  • Keep content related to programming in some way
  • If you're posting long videos try to add in some form of tldr for those who don't want to watch videos

Wormhole

Follow the wormhole through a path of communities [email protected]



founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] [email protected] 23 points 8 months ago (5 children)

Jeez, what a rant. D was an interesting niche language a decade ago, but is it important in any meaningful sense now? It was supposed to be a better C without the bloat and madness of C++, right? But now, we have Golang (non-bloated, better C but with garbage collection) and Rust (no GC, less insane than C++, but considerable hair in the type system and elsewhere compared to C, partly to enforce memory safety while lots of dynamic allocation is happening). And we have always had Ada (no GC, less hairy than C++, memory safe by default, but quite bureaucratic and not very conducive to dynamic memory).

Where again was D supposed to fit into this? Does it check approximately the same boxes as Ada but with less bureaucracy? I've read about it a little bit but never tried to use it.

As someone who likes expressive type systems (Haskell, OCaml) and good concurrency (GHC, Erlang) it looks to me like Rust is attempting the right thing, for those who require deterministic memory usage and dynamism at the same time. While Go is nice if you like C-like simplicity and can accept some non-determinism. I don't understand the attractive application areas for D.

[โ€“] [email protected] 7 points 8 months ago

It was supposed to be a better C without the bloat and madness of C++, right?

D was sold as a better C++, way back then when C++ was stuck with C++98. To be more clear, D promised to be C++ under active development. That was it's selling point.

In the meantime C++ received 2 or 3 major updates, and thus D lost any claim to relevance.

load more comments (4 replies)