On Sunday, 24 May 2020 at 11:01:58 UTC, Les De Ridder wrote:
>
> C++ and D(asBetterC) are viable replacements in my experience. C++
> explicitly has design goals like 'Leave no room for a lower level
> language' and the zero-overhead principle. These generally apply to
> DasBetterC too.
>
> Many would also argue that Rust and some newer languages like Zig fit
> the bill too.

Well the jury is still out on these. Until we see a real OS written in Rust or D or Zig - he proof is not in claims but in the doing.

On Saturday, 23 May 2020 at 02:26:38 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
> On 5/22/2020 12:08 AM, Araq wrote:
>> [x] Compiler writers had considerable effort in implementing the new standards. Check.
>
> Nope. (Note that I speak from actual experience.) Want something that's hard to implement? See exception handling, which wasn't added.

Aren't setjmp/longjmp a form of exception handling?

On 24.05.20 11:29, Dibyendu Majumdar wrote:
> Types are a convenience for manipulating memory - a piece of memory can be recast to any type at any time.

That's not true with strict aliasing.

On Sunday, 24 May 2020 at 11:08:42 UTC, Dibyendu Majumdar wrote:
> On Sunday, 24 May 2020 at 11:01:58 UTC, Les De Ridder wrote:
>>
>> C++ and D(asBetterC) are viable replacements in my experience. C++
>> explicitly has design goals like 'Leave no room for a lower level
>> language' and the zero-overhead principle. These generally apply to
>> DasBetterC too.
>>
>> Many would also argue that Rust and some newer languages like Zig fit
>> the bill too.
>
> Well the jury is still out on these. Until we see a real OS written in Rust or D or Zig - he proof is not in claims but in the doing.

I haven't used it, but here's an OS written in Rust, https://www.redox-os.org/. Zig will probably be used to write one, too. I wish I could say the same for D, but the former two languages have mind-share, and developers are enthused by them.

On Sunday, 24 May 2020 at 16:05:38 UTC, The Holy Drinker wrote:
> I haven't used it, but here's an OS written in Rust, https://www.redox-os.org/. Zig will probably be used to write one, too. I wish I could say the same for D, but the former two languages have mind-share, and developers are enthused by them.

There is a kernel written in D:

https://github.com/PowerNex/PowerNex

On Sunday, 24 May 2020 at 17:49:02 UTC, Meta wrote:
> On Sunday, 24 May 2020 at 16:05:38 UTC, The Holy Drinker wrote:
>> I haven't used it, but here's an OS written in Rust, https://www.redox-os.org/. Zig will probably be used to write one, too. I wish I could say the same for D, but the former two languages have mind-share, and developers are enthused by them.
>
> There is a kernel written in D:
>
> https://github.com/PowerNex/PowerNex

Yes, but it's nowhere near where redox is at, and I doubt it ever will be in such a place. Plus, Rust is much younger than D, and it already has an OS that's actively developed and fairly along. Such is life.

On Sunday, 24 May 2020 at 23:22:42 UTC, The Holy Drinker wrote:
> Yes, but it's nowhere near where redox is at, and I doubt it ever will be in such a place. Plus, Rust is much younger than D, and it already has an OS that's actively developed and fairly along. Such is life.

I think the powernex thing started off as a fork of one of my little toys I was doing 2012ish - D is quite excellent for the task, was back then and even better now - but the task is also basically a waste of time.

It is something you do because you have time to kill so it favors the young.

On Saturday, 23 May 2020 at 15:18:51 UTC, Tony wrote:
>
> Joakim kept arguing in an increasingly petulant manner that the D conference should be canceled. He appeared to think that he had proven that it should be canceled and would not consider any notion that if enough people want to go to it, it should be held. I would guess he left because he couldn’t get his way.

"petulant", interesting.

> I can see why you are very concerned about forum moderation as you don’t appear to use D and seem to visit the forum to solely to get perverse pleasure from degrading the language and those who work on it.

Well, this shows you the flexible standards that are applied here. Your comment is unprofessional, it belittles others and makes assumptions about other people's motives. Very well, I'm not a snowflake, but in the name of consistency may I ask Mike Parker to remove Tony's comment. It fulfills the criteria that make a comment eligible for deletion according to Mike Parker's and Walter Bright's own definition. Anything else would be inconsistent and reek of double standards (and people will notice it sooner or later).

On Saturday, 23 May 2020 at 02:59:18 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
> On 5/22/2020 8:27 AM, Chris wrote:
>> Second, Walter, I've noticed that the word "unprofessional" has become a blanket term for anything the D leadership doesn't like / want to hear. In my opinion, D has become a political enterprise.
>
> Belittling other members and/or impugning their motives, is unprofessional behavior. It's not hard to understand.

May I ask you to remove this comment then:

https://forum.dlang.org/post/dnvcsbzrzeboxucmejdm@forum.dlang.org

Secondly, again you do not answer a single question or address any of the issues raised. This pattern stared to emerge around 2017 I think. Instead of addressing issues raised the manner in which they are raised is more important. So an inconvenient comment / question is either labelled as "unprofessional" or "unspecific". In this way you don't need to address the issue. Hm, politicians do that when they have no substantial arguments, engineers shouldn't behave like that. So once again:

1. Is the list of companies that use D up to date? What is D mainly used for or is it still being used actively? E.g. Facebook, do they still use it?

2. Will there be some sort of D3 that incorporates all the great features and drops the dead weight? It would actually be a good monument of your life's work.

On Saturday, 23 May 2020 at 16:01:22 UTC, Mike Parker wrote:
> On Saturday, 23 May 2020 at 14:33:02 UTC, Chris wrote:
>
>>
>> Deleting criticism is certainly not the right approach and will come back to bite you. Sometimes it's easier to just do the dishes than to come up with ever new excuses why you can't do the dishes. Why not write a new clean version of D?
>
> Again, we aren't deleting criticism. If we were, 90% of your posts would have hit the bin by now. I repeat myself: criticism is welcome, the denigration of community members is not.

90%? Where's the proof? You shouldn't make exact statements like that based on an estimate.