On Thursday, 19 October 2017 at 13:09:25 UTC, Dukc wrote:
> Perhaps. Well, contrasted to .Net and JVM standard libraries then?

When it comes to imperative languages I certainly think the libraries/frameworks will discourage some programming styles.

Some parts of the D standard library also assume that you follow a particular style. Nothing wrong with it. It is different to reason about programs that combine many different styles.

In some ways that has been a problem in C++. Libraries being wildly different in style. Which they now try to correct by having central guidelines and narrow down the "idiomatic" styles in the new additions to the C++ standard library…

> In most regards they are very different, yes. But the similarity is that like C++/D, Forth is designed with many different programming styles in mind, instead of paving way primarily for one certain way of working.

Hm, I don't see the connection. Forth was designed to run on an 8-bit CPU, basically providing a simple memory-compact representation for controlling hardware. I think Forth encourages a rather peculiar way of programming, but maybe you are thinking about some modern dialect.

> Of course D is very close philosophically to C++, that's what gave it the name in the first place! The main difference is that there's no burden of backwards compatibilty with C/C++, and as proven it's enough of difference for many.

Actually, I think D has put way too much emphasis on C compatibility. That's an area where Rust got something right by not trying to be a C superset a priori.

On Wednesday, 25 October 2017 at 18:12:23 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote:
> Actually, I think D has put way too much emphasis on C compatibility. That's an area where Rust got something right by not trying to be a C superset a priori.

Personally, I think D's emphasis on C compatability is one of its primary strengths.

C still rules the world, and does so for a good reason. Programmers like the freedom that C provides. Systems programming languages need the freedom that C provides. Many 'new' languages simply wan't to take it away. They just don't get it.

The only reason I like D, is because it doesn't focus on jettisoning the freedom of C, but rather offers you ways to do C like stuff, safer and better...and throws in a lot more too...it's not an easy balance to get, but it does it really well.

It is essentially the C++ we should have had.

The world needs D, much more than it needs Rust.( the writing is already on the wall for Rust .. IMHO).

I notice that D is not even listed on stack overflows 2017 'developers most loved languages':

https://insights.stackoverflow.com/survey/2017#most-loved-dreaded-and-wanted

It's not because programmers don't like it. They just don't know about it..yet ;-)

Once the word really gets out though, it will be D's ecosystem that will decide its path forward...