Thread overview |
---|
August 24, 2001 D sounds great | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
I just read over the spec and I'm *very* excited about D. I'm a Java programmer (no, not applets, but real heavy duty enterprise stuff), and have gone from being a skeptic to being extremely impressed with Java. The performance hit is *well* worth the portability, the ease of debugging and creating "correct" programs, and of course the vast (and very well designed) core library. I have always wanted a native Java-like language, and wondered why nobody really was interested in making a native Java compiler (ok, there are a few here and there), because the language itself is really nice. I now see that D fulfills this. It takes all the backwards compatibility and bizarre cruft out of C++, and marries it with features of Java that aid and simplify programming and debugging. Most of the D spec is a litany of Java features - garbage collection, single inheritence, interfaces, compilation unit based name spaces...the keywords and terminology are also mostly identical. D does add a feature that I've admired in Object Pascal, which is "properties" (although it does it in a different way), which is also a nice way to skirt non-first class, or half-class objects (arrays, etc.). I was waiting for something to fill the gap between C++ and Java, and D appears to do this beautifully. I'm convinced that most of the Java library can even be implemented quite nicely for D (the syntax is *so* similary Java-to-D ports should be really straightforward). (I happen to think that the Java class library does "simply and efficiently implement common, basic file I/O operations."...it's very much like the C++ library in terms of classes hierarchy). So when does the compiler come out ;) Aaron Hamid Cornell University |
August 24, 2001 Re: D sounds great | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Aaron | Aaron wrote in message <3B865A5B.FC094575@cornell.edu>... >I just read over the spec and I'm *very* excited about D. I'm a Java programmer (no, not applets, but real heavy duty enterprise stuff), and have gone from being a skeptic to being extremely impressed with Java. The performance hit is *well* worth the portability, One of my design goals for D is not to have a performance hit. > the ease of >debugging and creating "correct" programs, Yes! > and of course the vast (and >very well designed) core library. That will be a problem with D, at least initially. > I have always wanted a native >Java-like language, > and wondered why nobody really was interested in >making a native Java compiler (ok, there are a few here and there), because the language itself is really nice. I now see that D fulfills this. It takes all the backwards compatibility and bizarre cruft out of C++, and marries it with features of Java that aid and simplify programming and debugging. Most of the D spec is a litany of Java features - garbage collection, single inheritence, interfaces, compilation unit based name spaces...the keywords and terminology are also mostly identical. D does add a feature that I've admired in Object Pascal, which is "properties" (although it does it in a different way), which is also a nice way to skirt non-first class, or half-class objects (arrays, etc.). I was waiting for something to fill the gap between C++ and Java, and D appears to do this beautifully. I'm convinced that most of the Java library can even be implemented quite nicely for D (the syntax is *so* similary Java-to-D ports should be really straightforward). (I happen to think that the Java class library does "simply and efficiently implement common, basic file I/O operations."...it's very much like the C++ library in terms of classes hierarchy). I think D has a lot to offer that Java doesn't have. See the FAQ: www.digitalmars.com/d/faq.html#q7 |
August 26, 2001 Re: D sounds great | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
| ||||
Posted in reply to Walter | "Walter" <walter@digitalmars.com> wrote in message news:9m5t27$21n4$3@digitaldaemon.com... > > Aaron wrote in message <3B865A5B.FC094575@cornell.edu>... > >I just read over the spec and I'm *very* excited about D. I'm a Java programmer (no, not applets, but real heavy duty enterprise stuff), and have gone from being a skeptic to being extremely impressed with Java. The performance hit is *well* worth the portability, > > One of my design goals for D is not to have a performance hit. > > > the ease of > >debugging and creating "correct" programs, > > Yes! Without enforcing exception specification, there will be one important area in which D has *less* power than Java to create correct programs. Peter. |
Copyright © 1999-2021 by the D Language Foundation