On Monday, 22 November 2021 at 21:38:57 UTC, forkit wrote:
> For the time, perhaps not. But in hindsight, all C++ did, was to 'add onto' a language that provided very little in terms of safety guarantees.
Yes. Bjarne Stroustrup missed the modelling features of Simula (OOP and coroutines) and added those to C. Of course, C++ became the black bastardized sheep of OOP and academics frowned... Then Java was inspired by OOP and more or less reimplemented Simula (semantically close), and Bjarne got a prize for his OOP efforts. :-D
> A lot of the code in the future, will need formal safety guarantees, and at some point, I wouldn't be surprised if countries start passing legislation to mandate this (well, they already do this in some industries anyway).
D cannot provide such guarantees.. and will never be in a position to do so.
D could become interesting for small businesses or individuals that create commercial interactive desktop products. Clean up the semantics, syntax, memory management and build an application framework for D.
I guess Swift is workable, to some extent, but very Mac centric and requires some C. D could be a cross platform replacement for Swift + C.
But it takes a lot of focus on polish (semantics + syntax). And well, "focus" and "polish" requires disciplined planning.
> Or is it just nice to play around with.
I'd say that latter, in which case.. (to get back on topic).. who really cares when D2 is finished ;-)
I'd care, if it was polished and suitable for effectively creating highly interactive software.
But then we come back to disciplined planning. Which seems to be an unsurmountable challenge.