News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on The Case for D. Parent comment

Re:The Case for D by steveklabnik on Friday October 30, 2009 @01:49PM (#912431)
First of all, D2 is not mature at all. It's like asking "Is C++0x mature enough?"

Secondly, lots of people won't ever switch to D2, even when it's done, because they feel that it adds a lot of feature bloat for very little gain.

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The Case for D by ponce on Saturday October 31, 2009 @09:54AM (#913526)
I don't think many-cores compatibility is a little gain.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The Case for D by steveklabnik on Saturday October 31, 2009 @11:21AM (#913609)
That's a compiler issue, not a language issue.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The Case for D by ponce on Saturday October 31, 2009 @01:47PM (#913787)
A language without purity / proper constness / powerful static checking will not be automatically parallelized.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:The Case for D by h3r3tic on Saturday October 31, 2009 @01:49PM (#913789)
Wrong. D2 has features to ease multi-threaded development, so it's a language 'issue'.
[ Parent | on HN ]