www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D - Zig mentions D in justifying its existence

reply Joakim <dlang joakim.fea.st> writes:
Probably a good sign that they mention D with C++ and Rust and 
have looked at D features:

https://github.com/zig-lang/zig/wiki/Why-Zig-When-There-is-Already-CPP%2C-D%2C-and-Rust%3F

These recent articles also mention D or talk about some similar 
features:

http://videocortex.io/2017/Bestiary/
https://medium.com/ kasperpeulen/10-features-from-various-modern-languages-that-i-would-like-to-see-in-any-programming-language-f2a4a8ee6727
Nov 13 2017
next sibling parent reply Jonathan M Davis <newsgroup.d jmdavisprog.com> writes:
On Monday, November 13, 2017 16:12:42 Joakim via Digitalmars-d wrote:

 Probably a good sign that they mention D with C++ and Rust and
 have looked at D features:

 https://github.com/zig-lang/zig/wiki/Why-Zig-When-There-is-Already-CPP%2C->
D%2C-and-Rust%3F


Glancing over what they say there, it sounds like they're trying to write a
better version of C.

- Jonathan M Davis
Nov 13 2017
next sibling parent reply Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQ=?= writes:
On Monday, 13 November 2017 at 16:30:23 UTC, Jonathan M Davis 
wrote:

 Glancing over what they say there, it sounds like they're 
 trying to write a better version of C.


Yes http://ziglang.org/:
«Zig competes with C instead of depending on it. The Zig Standard 
Library does not depend on libc.»

The syntax seems to be mixing C with a little bit of Rust.

But no plans to add meta-programming or type system support for 
memory?

Ugh.

Ola.
Nov 13 2017
parent Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQ=?= writes:
On Monday, 13 November 2017 at 17:00:56 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad 
wrote:

 But no plans to add meta-programming or type system support for 
 memory?


Hm, the github page says «Zig has no macros and no 
metaprogramming», but their homepage says «Generic data 
structures and functions» and «Compile-time reflection and 
compile-time code execution.»

So…

Not sure what they mean. Maybe they mean no AST-macros?

*shrug*
Nov 13 2017
prev sibling next sibling parent Kagamin <spam here.lot> writes:
On Monday, 13 November 2017 at 16:30:23 UTC, Jonathan M Davis 
wrote:

 Glancing over what they say there, it sounds like they're 
 trying to write a better version of C.


More like go with generics.
Nov 14 2017
prev sibling parent reply Tony <tonytdominguez aol.com> writes:
I am surprised C hasn't tried to become a "better C". Add a 
string datatype (and maybe other datatypes like datetime). Add an 
array type (static and/or dynamic) that doesn't suffer from 
"array decay" when passed to a function or returned from a 
function. Provide an alternative to the ridiculous syntax for 
declaring a function pointer. And copy the scope() guard from D. 
They could also add some data structure code to the standard 
library. Not a lot of changes and suddenly the language is a lot 
more usable for all those GNU programs (and any like them) that 
are written in C.
Nov 15 2017
next sibling parent codephantom <me noyb.com> writes:
On Thursday, 16 November 2017 at 02:48:27 UTC, Tony wrote:

 I am surprised C hasn't tried to become a "better C". Add a 
 string datatype (and maybe other datatypes like datetime). Add 
 an array type (static and/or dynamic) that doesn't suffer from 
 "array decay" when passed to a function or returned from a 
 function. Provide an alternative to the ridiculous syntax for 
 declaring a function pointer. And copy the scope() guard from 
 D. They could also add some data structure code to the standard 
 library. Not a lot of changes and suddenly the language is a 
 lot more usable for all those GNU programs (and any like them) 
 that are written in C.


What I really love about the evolution of C, is that 'it can' 
resist giving in to those temptations ;-)

I still have 'The C Programming Language' (1988) next to my pc, 
and I enjoy glancing over it now and then, knowing that 
everything in it is still valid. ;-)

And anyway, one change..always leads to another..and then 
another..and then another......

resist! resist!

A better C belongs in a new language.
Nov 15 2017
prev sibling parent Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQ=?= writes:
On Thursday, 16 November 2017 at 02:48:27 UTC, Tony wrote:

 I am surprised C hasn't tried to become a "better C".


Most of the people that wanted to work on a spec for a better C 
has already moved to C++ or other languages. The ones that remain 
want C to stay simple, but they have added new stuff, even 
generics:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C11_(C_standard_revision)

Ola
Nov 16 2017
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Ali <fakeemailadress example.com> writes:
On Monday, 13 November 2017 at 16:12:42 UTC, Joakim wrote:

 Probably a good sign that they mention D with C++ and Rust and 
 have looked at D features:

 https://github.com/zig-lang/zig/wiki/Why-Zig-When-There-is-Already-CPP%2C-D%2C-and-Rust%3F


https://sympa.inria.fr/sympa/arc/caml-list/2017-11/msg00031.html

 From the link:
"The position is part of the SecurOCaml project
(http://ocamlpro.github.io/SecurOCaml/) and aims at improving the
usability and reliability of OCaml for the development of
high-assurance applications."

I think HAA seems like where many people are looking at the moment
I am not convinced that this will make a dent in C or C++ 
popularity or usage
but, yet, it will be a sizable niche that C or C++ will not 
dominate
Nov 13 2017
parent Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQ=?= writes:
On Monday, 13 November 2017 at 18:11:45 UTC, Ali wrote:

 I think HAA seems like where many people are looking at the 
 moment
 I am not convinced that this will make a dent in C or C++ 
 popularity or usage
 but, yet, it will be a sizable niche that C or C++ will not 
 dominate


But how is that relevant for Zig? It doesn't appear to use formal 
methods.
Nov 13 2017
prev sibling next sibling parent reply codephantom <me noyb.com> writes:
On Monday, 13 November 2017 at 16:12:42 UTC, Joakim wrote:

 Probably a good sign that they mention D with C++ and Rust and 
 have looked at D features:


An interesting project.

Some good points made too.

As someone new to D, I think this point stood out the most(for 
me):

"C++, Rust, and D have a large number of features and it can be 
distracting from the actual meaning of the application you are 
working on. One finds themselves debugging their knowledge of the 
programming language instead of debugging the application itself."
Nov 13 2017
next sibling parent reply Fra Mecca <me francescomecca.eu> writes:
On Tuesday, 14 November 2017 at 01:01:16 UTC, codephantom wrote:

 On Monday, 13 November 2017 at 16:12:42 UTC, Joakim wrote:

 Probably a good sign that they mention D with C++ and Rust and 
 have looked at D features:


 An interesting project.

 Some good points made too.

 As someone new to D, I think this point stood out the most(for 
 me):

 "C++, Rust, and D have a large number of features and it can be 
 distracting from the actual meaning of the application you are 
 working on. One finds themselves debugging their knowledge of 
 the programming language instead of debugging the application 
 itself."


That is c++. I don't have this problem with D, but Go for sure 
represent that feeling taken to the extreme
Nov 13 2017
next sibling parent Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQ=?= writes:
On Tuesday, 14 November 2017 at 06:11:34 UTC, Fra Mecca wrote:

 On Tuesday, 14 November 2017 at 01:01:16 UTC, codephantom wrote:

 "C++, Rust, and D have a large number of features and it can 
 be distracting from the actual meaning of the application you 
 are working on. One finds themselves debugging their knowledge 
 of the programming language instead of debugging the 
 application itself."


 That is c++. I don't have this problem with D, but Go for sure 
 represent that feeling taken to the extreme


Why Go? The Go semantics are fairly straight forward except their 
take on "exception handling".
Nov 14 2017
prev sibling parent codephantom <me noyb.com> writes:
On Tuesday, 14 November 2017 at 06:11:34 UTC, Fra Mecca wrote:

 That is c++. I don't have this problem with D, but Go for sure 
 represent that feeling taken to the extreme


I'm not sure i can agree with the comment about go.

if wanted a language I could get my head around, and my only 
choice was go or d, then I'd go go...without doubt.

don't get me wrong. i love d. it's a refreshing language full off 
new possibilites.

but at the moment, is seems less like the planet mars, and more 
like a few galaxies crashing into each other....with the newly 
formed galaxy still being under construction.

of course, that too would be an exciting thing to observe.

I would expect that the future of D (or future users of D), will 
need to distill this chaos into something that's a little more 
managable.

In the mean time, I'll enjoy the chaos...while it lasts :D

c++ however, is like a gigantic black hole...which D too will 
become, I guess, at some point.
Nov 14 2017
prev sibling next sibling parent Mark <smarksc gmail.com> writes:
On Tuesday, 14 November 2017 at 01:01:16 UTC, codephantom wrote:

 On Monday, 13 November 2017 at 16:12:42 UTC, Joakim wrote:

 Probably a good sign that they mention D with C++ and Rust and 
 have looked at D features:


 An interesting project.

 Some good points made too.

 As someone new to D, I think this point stood out the most(for 
 me):

 "C++, Rust, and D have a large number of features and it can be 
 distracting from the actual meaning of the application you are 
 working on. One finds themselves debugging their knowledge of 
 the programming language instead of debugging the application 
 itself."


This is pretty much inevitable, since C++, Rust and D all aim at 
being a general-purpose language. Therefore they must provide 
solid support for multiple programming paradigms. So there is 
nothing to prevent a user of any of these languages to use all 
the features of the language in an incoherent or obfuscated 
manner.
Nov 14 2017
prev sibling parent reply solidstate1991 <laszloszeremi outlook.com> writes:
On Tuesday, 14 November 2017 at 01:01:16 UTC, codephantom wrote:

 As someone new to D, I think this point stood out the most(for 
 me):

 "C++, Rust, and D have a large number of features and it can be 
 distracting from the actual meaning of the application you are 
 working on. One finds themselves debugging their knowledge of 
 the programming language instead of debugging the application 
 itself."


The best thing about language features, that you don't have to 
use them. I just very recently started using certain language 
features (eg. templates, conditional compilation), and for a long 
time I used it like Java without forcing classes into everything. 
Often I just don't find a use for them, so I won't make the 
compiler to do CTFE if it's not needed.
Nov 16 2017
parent bauss <jj_1337 live.dk> writes:
On Thursday, 16 November 2017 at 22:58:32 UTC, solidstate1991 
wrote:

 Often I just don't find a use for them, so I won't make the 
 compiler to do CTFE if it's not needed.


Why wouldn't you? It gives less overhead at run-time, giving your 
application better performance.
Nov 16 2017
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Michael V. Franklin <slavo5150 yahoo.com> writes:
On Monday, 13 November 2017 at 16:12:42 UTC, Joakim wrote:

 Probably a good sign that they mention D with C++ and Rust and 
 have looked at D features:

 https://github.com/zig-lang/zig/wiki/Why-Zig-When-There-is-Already-CPP%2C-D%2C-and-Rust%3F


"D has  property functions, which are methods that you call with 
what looks like field access, so in the above example, c.d might 
call a function."

That turned me off.  Despite everything I hate about D, I keep 
coming back to it for the "Modeling Power" and "Modern 
Convenience".  No other language that I'm aware of can complete 
with D on those two merits.

Also, everything ends up calling a subprocedure of some or 
another when all is said and done, so embrace it and leverage it, 
I say.

Mike
Nov 13 2017
parent codephantom <me noyb.com> writes:
On Tuesday, 14 November 2017 at 01:25:32 UTC, Michael V. Franklin 
wrote:

 That turned me off.  Despite everything I hate about D, I keep 
 coming back to it for the "Modeling Power" and "Modern 
 Convenience".  No other language that I'm aware of can complete 
 with D on those two merits.
 ...

 Mike


Yes. That's why I like D too.

My concern (which doesn't really affect me these days), is the 
potential for loss of productivity, from having to maintain 
someone else's D code - given the many different paradigms and 
features the D lang supports.

Finding developers that can be productive under those 
circumstances, may be challenging.

I think this would be a primary concern for anyone considering 
whether to adopt D into their codebase.

I go through a lot D code on github, to learn about how to use 
D...I still don't see the light at the end of the tunnel.. 
everyone uses it differently. I don't think that metaphor can 
even be used when it comes to D ;-)
Nov 13 2017
prev sibling parent Walter Bright <newshound2 digitalmars.com> writes:
On 11/13/2017 8:12 AM, Joakim wrote:

 Probably a good sign that they mention D with C++ and Rust and have looked at
D 
 features:
 
 https://github.com/zig-lang/zig/wiki/Why-Zig-When-There-is-Already-CPP
2C-D%2C-and-Rust%3F 



Aaannnddd, it's now on reddit:

https://www.reddit.com/r/programming/comments/7cumiy/why_use_zig_when_c_d_and_rust_exist
Nov 14 2017