On Thursday, 14 May 2020 at 08:42:43 UTC, ShadoLight wrote:
> On Wednesday, 13 May 2020 at 19:25:43 UTC, welkam wrote:
>> On Thursday, 7 May 2020 at 09:18:04 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:
>>> Because D is a re-engineering of C++
>>
>> I thought it was re-engineering of C
>
> This opinion seems quite common in the D community, but I frankly don't see it. If you are referring to the D subset defined by the BetterC switch, well, maybe then I would agree. But not for D in general.

At first this language was called Mars and it was simple. It was one man`s project. Walter fixed the flaws he saw in C but made sure that porting C to Mars was easy - copied code either compiled or threw an error.

Then Andrei came and he put all that metaprogramming, generics, introspection and more on top of the base that Walter built.

I dont think you can call D as re engineering of C++ when it was one person project. But historical accuracy is not why I raised that question. I remember there was a post by a C++ programmer that came to this mailing list saying that a year ago he  tried D because he was told that its similar to C++ but without all the cruft or something like that. I dont remember exactly. Because D does not behave like C++ that programmer didnt like the language. One year later he tried D again but this time he came to D from the point of it being like C but with its flaws fixed and stuff added to that core. Then he liked the language. The language didnt change but his enjoyment changed when he changed his expectations.