Revised D Language Front-End For GCC Submitted

[phoronix]

Phoronix: Revised D Language Front-End For GCC Submitted

D language support will be added to GCC and today the third revision to these patches have been published...

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=D-GCC-v3-Patches

[uid313]

Rust killed D.

[DanL]

Rust killed D.

This is coming from a totally objective source on the matter...
In other words, "Citations?"

[starshipeleven]

Video killed the radio Stars.

fixed

[garegin]

D was a nice language, but it came at a time when security wasn’t a big concern. Rust came at the right time, right place. The dev community finally woke up to the fact that they were finding sensational exploits every other day in 2014. Allmost all these were memory errors (shellshock being the huge exception)

[caligula]

Rust killed D.

Not only that, later C++ versions include much of D. So why use D when you have lots of the language via C++ available already?

[GreatEmerald]

Not only that, later C++ versions include much of D. So why use D when you have lots of the language via C++ available already?

Because C++ bolts the features on without breaking backwards compatibility, resulting in a mess. In other words, wake me up when header files and pointers are no longer needed in C++.

[caligula]

Because C++ bolts the features on without breaking backwards compatibility, resulting in a mess. In other words, wake me up when header files and pointers are no longer needed in C++.

I think you're confused. Some of the "new" features are exactly the same in C++. Think about the type infer stuff, templates. C++ community is hugely larger by a wide margin.

[Kemosabe]

Because C++ bolts the features on without breaking backwards compatibility, resulting in a mess. In other words, wake me up when header files and pointers are no longer needed in C++.

C pointers are indeed not "needed". But for optimal performance (C++ has this option), you might want to prefer them over spamming shared_pointers everywhere. It is only a mess if you are too lazy to learn the basics (every 12 year old calls himself app dev) and choose the right path (means coding conventions) for your project. With freedom of choice comes responsibility - too much of a burden for people these days I guess.

Modules are in the works and I rather prefer waiting for a proper solution than learning to know what a real mess means.
And btw: How many of the big security issues we experienced the last years are C programs actually?

[jacob]

Rust killed D.

I don't think so. Rust has the "cool" factor but D is used for many in-house development projects and they are not going to switch over to another language. D and Rust are not direct competitors anyway. D is intended to be a C++ that doesn't suck, and there is and will be a demand for precisely that kind of language. Rust wants to be a lower level language but, at the same time, keep a strong focus on parallelism and functional programming. It has a much steeper learning curve and is not meant to be the right language for everything. It's also relatively easy to rewrite a C or C++ project in D, rewriting it in Rust often needs a redesign.

D has suffered from the same problem as Ada: for a long time it wasn't really possible for Joe Coder to get his hands on a production-grade compiler and start hacking. It's finally changing now with advanced D support in GCC, but we can only hope that it's not too late.