Michael S (already5chosen.delete@this.yahoo.com) on July 20, 2021 10:14 am wrote:
> Anon (no.delete@this.spam.com) on July 20, 2021 6:24 am wrote:
> > gallier2 (gallier2.delete@this.gmx.de) on July 20, 2021 4:57 am wrote:
> > > Looks like a good candidate for D.
> > > https://tour.dlang.org/
> >
> > I like D, but this language don't have all the support for
> > me to try it, the big boys usually prefer to create
> > their own language instead of adopting one so we ended with many similar languages but incompatible.
> >
>
> Isn't D GC-based, so unsuitable for kernel?
>

No, the GC is optional and D can be used for an OS kernel without problems.

Nevertheless, some parts of its standard library depend on the GC, so those parts are no longer available when the GC is not used.


I like D much more than any other C replacement, because it is obvious that it was designed by people with experience in programming language implementation and it is uniformly better than C, unlike other alternatives that succeed to include some worse features besides the better features.


Most such attempts of creating new programming languages include a few very useful and interesting new ideas in those languages, but then they combine them with other questionable programming language features, which have been proven to be inferior many decades ago, but the authors of those new programming languages do not seem to have any knowledge about the old programming languages or research papers that have shown better ways.