Probably a good sign that they mention D with C++ and Rust and have looked at D features:

https://github.com/zig-lang/zig/wiki/Why-Zig-When-There-is-Already-CPP%2C-D%2C-and-Rust%3F

These recent articles also mention D or talk about some similar features:

http://videocortex.io/2017/Bestiary/
https://medium.com/@kasperpeulen/10-features-from-various-modern-languages-that-i-would-like-to-see-in-any-programming-language-f2a4a8ee6727

On Monday, November 13, 2017 16:12:42 Joakim via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> Probably a good sign that they mention D with C++ and Rust and have looked at D features:
>
> https://github.com/zig-lang/zig/wiki/Why-Zig-When-There-is-Already-CPP%2C-> D%2C-and-Rust%3F

Glancing over what they say there, it sounds like they're trying to write a better version of C.

- Jonathan M Davis

On Monday, 13 November 2017 at 16:30:23 UTC, Jonathan M Davis wrote:
> Glancing over what they say there, it sounds like they're trying to write a better version of C.

Yes http://ziglang.org/:
«Zig competes with C instead of depending on it. The Zig Standard Library does not depend on libc.»

The syntax seems to be mixing C with a little bit of Rust.

But no plans to add meta-programming or type system support for memory?

Ugh.

Ola.

On Monday, 13 November 2017 at 17:00:56 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote:
> But no plans to add meta-programming or type system support for memory?

Hm, the github page says «Zig has no macros and no metaprogramming», but their homepage says «Generic data structures and functions» and «Compile-time reflection and compile-time code execution.»

So…

Not sure what they mean. Maybe they mean no AST-macros?

*shrug*

On Monday, 13 November 2017 at 16:12:42 UTC, Joakim wrote:
> Probably a good sign that they mention D with C++ and Rust and have looked at D features:
>
> https://github.com/zig-lang/zig/wiki/Why-Zig-When-There-is-Already-CPP%2C-D%2C-and-Rust%3F
>
https://sympa.inria.fr/sympa/arc/caml-list/2017-11/msg00031.html

From the link:
"The position is part of the SecurOCaml project
(http://ocamlpro.github.io/SecurOCaml/) and aims at improving the
usability and reliability of OCaml for the development of
high-assurance applications."

I think HAA seems like where many people are looking at the moment
I am not convinced that this will make a dent in C or C++ popularity or usage
but, yet, it will be a sizable niche that C or C++ will not dominate

On Monday, 13 November 2017 at 18:11:45 UTC, Ali wrote:
> I think HAA seems like where many people are looking at the moment
> I am not convinced that this will make a dent in C or C++ popularity or usage
> but, yet, it will be a sizable niche that C or C++ will not dominate

But how is that relevant for Zig? It doesn't appear to use formal methods.

On Monday, 13 November 2017 at 16:12:42 UTC, Joakim wrote:
> Probably a good sign that they mention D with C++ and Rust and have looked at D features:
>

An interesting project.

Some good points made too.

As someone new to D, I think this point stood out the most(for me):

"C++, Rust, and D have a large number of features and it can be distracting from the actual meaning of the application you are working on. One finds themselves debugging their knowledge of the programming language instead of debugging the application itself."

On Monday, 13 November 2017 at 16:12:42 UTC, Joakim wrote:
> Probably a good sign that they mention D with C++ and Rust and have looked at D features:
>
> https://github.com/zig-lang/zig/wiki/Why-Zig-When-There-is-Already-CPP%2C-D%2C-and-Rust%3F

"D has @property functions, which are methods that you call with what looks like field access, so in the above example, c.d might call a function."

That turned me off.  Despite everything I hate about D, I keep coming back to it for the "Modeling Power" and "Modern Convenience".  No other language that I'm aware of can complete with D on those two merits.

Also, everything ends up calling a subprocedure of some or another when all is said and done, so embrace it and leverage it, I say.

Mike

On Tuesday, 14 November 2017 at 01:25:32 UTC, Michael V. Franklin wrote:
> That turned me off.  Despite everything I hate about D, I keep coming back to it for the "Modeling Power" and "Modern Convenience".  No other language that I'm aware of can complete with D on those two merits.
> ...
>
> Mike

Yes. That's why I like D too.

My concern (which doesn't really affect me these days), is the potential for loss of productivity, from having to maintain someone else's D code - given the many different paradigms and features the D lang supports.

Finding developers that can be productive under those circumstances, may be challenging.

I think this would be a primary concern for anyone considering whether to adopt D into their codebase.

I go through a lot D code on github, to learn about how to use D...I still don't see the light at the end of the tunnel.. everyone uses it differently. I don't think that metaphor can even be used when it comes to D ;-)

On Tuesday, 14 November 2017 at 01:01:16 UTC, codephantom wrote:
> On Monday, 13 November 2017 at 16:12:42 UTC, Joakim wrote:
>> Probably a good sign that they mention D with C++ and Rust and have looked at D features:
>>
>
> An interesting project.
>
> Some good points made too.
>
> As someone new to D, I think this point stood out the most(for me):
>
> "C++, Rust, and D have a large number of features and it can be distracting from the actual meaning of the application you are working on. One finds themselves debugging their knowledge of the programming language instead of debugging the application itself."

That is c++. I don't have this problem with D, but Go for sure represent that feeling taken to the extreme