On Tuesday, 26 March 2013 at 10:08:30 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
> On 3/26/2013 3:04 AM, Walter Bright wrote:
>> On 3/26/2013 2:38 AM, Rory McGuire wrote:
>>> Thanks I remember about the -profile switch but I don't see memory usage there.
>>
>> -profile and -cov do not track memory usage.
>>
>>> If you see your program using more and more memory even though it should not be
>>> how do you check where the problem is?
>>
>> I've written memory usage profilers before, but haven't done one for D. You're
>> the first to ask for one.
>
> Now that I think about it, it wouldn't be that hard to add memory allocated per function when using -profile.
>
> But my larger point is how simple it is to use -cov and -profile; it's hard to imagine it being any easier.

Something like this?

http://visualvm.java.net/features.html

On Saturday, 16 March 2013 at 14:42:58 UTC, Suliman wrote:
> Hi folks! I had wrote small article about Rust vs D. I hope that you will like it!
>
> http://versusit.org/rust-vs-d

I don't know if you still follow this, but there's a typo here:

Now, let’s see, how the code, outputting the word "Hello" 10 times, will look. In Rust it will look like this:

    fn main() {
        for 100.times {
        ...

Should be:

        ...
        for 10.times {
        ...

Also, the formatting still sucks and imports are missing for the D code, whereas imports are verbosely stated in Rust. FWIW, "std::io::println" can be stated as just "println", since it's available by default. Don't know if this was the case when you wrote the post though...

Also, you don't mention the difference between D and Rust in switch statements (FWIW, Rust doesn't have switch statements, they're now "match" statements, which are closer to haskell's case statements than D's switch, because D's switch has optional fallthrough (goto case;) and Rust has no fallthrough.

Also, I second the objection to your exception example. D does have exceptions and there are some very important differences between them and Rust's exception handling (which is more like Go's recover() than D's catch).

On Saturday, 16 March 2013 at 14:42:58 UTC, Suliman wrote:
> Hi folks! I had wrote small article about Rust vs D. I hope that you will like it!
>
> http://versusit.org/rust-vs-d

There is more online activity in Rust vs. D corner. See http://relistan.com/a-week-with-mozilla-rust/, which is about Rust, but commentators inevitably end up making comparisons with D. More discussion on reddit: http://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/1kub90/a_week_with_mozillas_rust/.

On Monday, 18 March 2013 at 19:05:09 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
> On 3/18/2013 3:25 AM, bearophile wrote:
>> Walter Bright:
>>
>>> That's just not an issue when you have 64 bits of address space. You can still
>>> have 4 billion stacks of 4 billion bytes each.
>>
>> At this point I suggest you to study exactly why Rust developers have decided to
>> use a segmented stack. It seems to work well for them.
>
> If you know a reason, please post one.

I believe the Rust developers are also targeting embedded systems that may not have 64-bit virtual address spaces.  Hence the spaghetti stacks.

> The trick is to make something which is powerful and flexible for the
> experienced user and yet not too daunting for the newbie. I don't know how
> well we've succeeded on that front, but I'm sure that more tutorials and
> better documentation and whatnot would help.
>
> - Jonathan M Davis

Jonathan you've answered some many of me questions and I wanted to comment on this thought.  I am a very poor programmer who has only used languages as needed to get a job done and never becoming good at any of them.  I picked up D to start developing some text processing tools.  I started with other guys in our office building these tools in Python but then learned I could actually generate tiny .exe's and not have to have Python installed on systems that I needed my tools on.  The slices and associative arrays are awesome.  I've acquired the habit of using the time functions and printing out how long it takes the program to do its work.  245ms! 657ms! LOL.  D rocks!  It is extremely complex and 90% of it is over my head but making my own little .exe's that blast through things orders of magnitude faster than the scripting languages is fun.  Keep up the good work all!

On Sunday, 17 March 2013 at 21:13:48 UTC, Paulo Pinto wrote:
>
> If I am not mistaken, Rust makes use of them as well.

Rust doesn't anymore:
https://mail.mozilla.org/pipermail/rust-dev/2013-November/006314.html

The announcement also mentions performance problems related to Go segmented stacks: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1wAaf1rYoM4S4gtnPh0zOlGzWtrZFQ5suE8qr2sD8uWQ/pub