https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ksTyCQwHGro&t=3317s

I wonder where D stands with regard to the author's various comparisons and contrasts between Rust and C++.

On Thursday, 13 May 2021 at 02:09:20 UTC, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ksTyCQwHGro&t=3317s
>
> I wonder where D stands with regard to the author's various comparisons and contrasts between Rust and C++.

I agree with the author for most of the part. I predicted that more and more people would notice some of the inconveniences with Rust, and the popularity will plateau.

For some years ago I did an investigation what language was the best to replace some of my C++ code (both embedded and application code) and I found Rust to be too inconvenient. This eventually led me to D which seems to be the language that can do most what I was looking for and is as well kind of forgiving.

This also makes me want to warn the D maintainers not to try to shoe horn features that you find in Rust into D too quickly. Give it more time and see what features can stand the test of time in Rust, what was a fad and what was not. D has recently taken too much impression from Rust with @safe as default and borrow checker (which isn't a new memory management method). Something I don't care that much about.

On Thursday, 13 May 2021 at 11:01:31 UTC, IGotD- wrote:
> I agree with the author for most of the part. I predicted that more and more people would notice some of the inconveniences with Rust, and the popularity will plateau.

I don't know. Professional adoption is slow and comes with improved tooling. Go is a very boring language and has surprising adoption levels (for such an uninteresting language).

> This also makes me want to warn the D maintainers not to try to shoe horn features that you find in Rust into D too quickly. Give it more time and see what features can stand the test of time in Rust, what was a fad and what was not. D has recently taken too much impression from Rust with @safe as default and borrow checker (which isn't a new memory management method). Something I don't care that much about.

Yes, don't bring more tedium into the language profile. D needs to appeal to hobbyists and people who use it for personal projects, and adding stuff that is tedious will be very bad. Less tedium... is where D can have an edge (in this climate).

On Thursday, 13 May 2021 at 11:32:08 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote:

> I don't know. Professional adoption is slow and comes with improved tooling. Go is a very boring language and has surprising adoption levels (for such an uninteresting language).

Yes, but it is
1.) a simple language
2.) baked by a big company

The first point make it suitable for productive software development, the second offers many jobs for go developers.

On Thursday, 13 May 2021 at 11:01:31 UTC, IGotD- wrote:
> I agree with the author for most of the part. I predicted that more and more people would notice some of the inconveniences with Rust, and the popularity will plateau.

I hope so, it was too much hyped for my taste.
Just remembering on the trifecta they promised, safe, concurrent and fast and that all with ownership/borrowing.

The truth is however, that borrowing is too limited to achieve concurrency treating your program literally to cooperative exclusive threading only.

Therefore, RC and ARC must be used instead which on the other hand eventually lead to unsafe code.

It was also hyped that borrowing/ownership replaces GC, but what I see in most codebases is the use of RC structures, just because they are more convenient.

On Thursday, 13 May 2021 at 14:36:51 UTC, sighoya wrote:
> On Thursday, 13 May 2021 at 11:01:31 UTC, IGotD- wrote:
>> I agree with the author for most of the part. I predicted that more and more people would notice some of the inconveniences with Rust, and the popularity will plateau.

https://blog.darklang.com/why-dark-didnt-choose-rust/