Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

I added enough to D that it didn't need a preprocessor, yet could do all those things.



I'm sure that D compile time facilities can do it all right. The issue is that the C++ bits (compile-time introspection) will never be standardized.


I really need to get around to looking into D.


When D showed up I really wanted it to become mainstream language. Unfortunately it did not.


Doesn't mean you can't use it. Lots of people do.


It does, because many delivery projects chose languages based on the product SDKs, so if it isn't in the box, they don't come into the discussion at all.

Also in the meantime, most of the cool stuff in D is showing up on the languages that come on those SDKs (C++, Java, C#), weakening the argument to look outside of SDK supported languages.

Doesn't matter if D had it first, or if it has a better implementation, worse is better, when ecosystem, tooling, IDE and technical support are part of the equation.

So it remains a language for hobby coding.


D is shipped as part of the Gnu compiler project.

> most of the cool stuff in D is showing up on the languages

It's true that many aspects of D are copied by other languages, but badly.


At most GCC could be considered as a piece of the Linux SDK, but that wasn't the kind of SDK I was talking about, rather a full end to end product SDK.

Badly copied doesn't matter, it is one reason less to look for where it came from.


All of my many products are commercial. I mostly have freedom to choose language. But I am also my own software development company and I have never felt brave enough to leave my client/s with the mountain of D code and no one to help after I went to develop next product somewhere else. This is very unfortunate.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: