www.digitalmars.com         C & C++   DMDScript  

digitalmars.D - Rename 'D' to 'D++'

reply Traktor TOni <trustthesky gmail.com> writes:
I think the name is just misleading, the D developers should at 
least be honest with themselves.
Mar 10 2017
next sibling parent reply Ethan Watson <gooberman gmail.com> writes:
On Friday, 10 March 2017 at 11:25:11 UTC, Traktor TOni wrote:

 I think the name is just misleading, the D developers should at 
 least be honest with themselves.



proof to the contrary is clearly fake proof.
Mar 10 2017
next sibling parent Chris <wendlec tcd.ie> writes:
On Friday, 10 March 2017 at 12:23:11 UTC, Ethan Watson wrote:

 On Friday, 10 March 2017 at 11:25:11 UTC, Traktor TOni wrote:

 I think the name is just misleading, the D developers should 
 at least be honest with themselves.



 proof to the contrary is clearly fake proof.


Don't feed the trolls++.
Mar 10 2017
prev sibling parent reply Traktor TOni <trustthesky gmail.com> writes:
On Friday, 10 March 2017 at 12:23:11 UTC, Ethan Watson wrote:

 On Friday, 10 March 2017 at 11:25:11 UTC, Traktor TOni wrote:

 I think the name is just misleading, the D developers should 
 at least be honest with themselves.



 proof to the contrary is clearly fake proof.


I am not sure what this has anything to do with version numbers? 
My point is that D is much more like C++ than it is like C, I 
think D should be honest and reflect that in its name. That's all 
I'm saying.
Mar 10 2017
next sibling parent reply TooHuman <michael toohuman.io> writes:
On Friday, 10 March 2017 at 14:19:17 UTC, Traktor TOni wrote:

 On Friday, 10 March 2017 at 12:23:11 UTC, Ethan Watson wrote:

 On Friday, 10 March 2017 at 11:25:11 UTC, Traktor TOni wrote:

 I think the name is just misleading, the D developers should 
 at least be honest with themselves.



 Any proof to the contrary is clearly fake proof.


 I am not sure what this has anything to do with version 
 numbers? My point is that D is much more like C++ than it is 
 like C, I think D should be honest and reflect that in its 
 name. That's all I'm saying.


So should Java be renamed to Java++? Or maybe D should be 
D-Java++?
Mar 10 2017
parent reply Chris <wendlec tcd.ie> writes:
On Friday, 10 March 2017 at 14:22:52 UTC, TooHuman wrote:

 On Friday, 10 March 2017 at 14:19:17 UTC, Traktor TOni wrote:

 On Friday, 10 March 2017 at 12:23:11 UTC, Ethan Watson wrote:

 On Friday, 10 March 2017 at 11:25:11 UTC, Traktor TOni wrote:

 I think the name is just misleading, the D developers should 
 at least be honest with themselves.



 Any proof to the contrary is clearly fake proof.


 I am not sure what this has anything to do with version 
 numbers? My point is that D is much more like C++ than it is 
 like C, I think D should be honest and reflect that in its 
 name. That's all I'm saying.


 So should Java be renamed to Java++? Or maybe D should be 
 D-Java++?


According to Wikipedia, D was influenced by:
Mar 10 2017
next sibling parent reply Traktor TOni <trustthesky gmail.com> writes:
On Friday, 10 March 2017 at 14:29:27 UTC, Chris wrote:

 On Friday, 10 March 2017 at 14:22:52 UTC, TooHuman wrote:

 On Friday, 10 March 2017 at 14:19:17 UTC, Traktor TOni wrote:

 On Friday, 10 March 2017 at 12:23:11 UTC, Ethan Watson wrote:

 On Friday, 10 March 2017 at 11:25:11 UTC, Traktor TOni wrote:

 I think the name is just misleading, the D developers 
 should at least be honest with themselves.



 Any proof to the contrary is clearly fake proof.


 I am not sure what this has anything to do with version 
 numbers? My point is that D is much more like C++ than it is 
 like C, I think D should be honest and reflect that in its 
 name. That's all I'm saying.


 So should Java be renamed to Java++? Or maybe D should be 
 D-Java++?


 According to Wikipedia, D was influenced by:







You dont have to get all salty about it, just admit that D is 
more like C++ and then we can propose the name change officially 
on github. Maybe this would help with adoption too, Rust has no 
problem calling itself a successor to C++ rather than C, so D 
shouldnt be afraid of this legacy either.
Mar 10 2017
next sibling parent Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQ=?= writes:
On Friday, 10 March 2017 at 14:39:18 UTC, Traktor TOni wrote:

 You dont have to get all salty about it, just admit that D is 
 more like C++ and then we can propose the name change 
 officially on github. Maybe this would help with adoption too, 
 Rust has no problem calling itself a successor to C++ rather 
 than C, so D shouldnt be afraid of this legacy either.


C+1 == D

C++
C == D
Mar 10 2017
prev sibling parent reply Chris <wendlec tcd.ie> writes:
On Friday, 10 March 2017 at 14:39:18 UTC, Traktor TOni wrote:

 On Friday, 10 March 2017 at 14:29:27 UTC, Chris wrote:

 On Friday, 10 March 2017 at 14:22:52 UTC, TooHuman wrote:

 On Friday, 10 March 2017 at 14:19:17 UTC, Traktor TOni wrote:

 On Friday, 10 March 2017 at 12:23:11 UTC, Ethan Watson wrote:

 [...]


 I am not sure what this has anything to do with version 
 numbers? My point is that D is much more like C++ than it is 
 like C, I think D should be honest and reflect that in its 
 name. That's all I'm saying.


 So should Java be renamed to Java++? Or maybe D should be 
 D-Java++?


 According to Wikipedia, D was influenced by:







 You dont have to get all salty about it, just admit that D is 
 more like C++ and then we can propose the name change 
 officially on github. Maybe this would help with adoption too, 
 Rust has no problem calling itself a successor to C++ rather 
 than C, so D shouldnt be afraid of this legacy either.


Why, then, is Rust called "Rust"? "C++" was chosen to signal that 
it's an improvement of C. "D++" would mean an improvement of D. 
If D is improved C++, then we would have to call it "C++++".

This thread is absurd and leads nowhere.
Mar 10 2017
parent reply Traktor TOni <trustthesky gmail.com> writes:
On Friday, 10 March 2017 at 15:10:34 UTC, Chris wrote:

 Why, then, is Rust called "Rust"? "C++" was chosen to signal 
 that it's an improvement of C. "D++" would mean an improvement 
 of D. If D is improved C++, then we would have to call it 
 "C++++".

 This thread is absurd and leads nowhere.


Rust has its own name, they don't have to follow any idea.
D has chosen to use the naming scheme of C and as such it should 
be honest and use D++ because that's what D is: An expanded 
version of the former language.
Mar 10 2017
next sibling parent rikki cattermole <rikki cattermole.co.nz> writes:
On 11/03/2017 4:16 AM, Traktor TOni wrote:

 On Friday, 10 March 2017 at 15:10:34 UTC, Chris wrote:

 Why, then, is Rust called "Rust"? "C++" was chosen to signal that it's
 an improvement of C. "D++" would mean an improvement of D. If D is
 improved C++, then we would have to call it "C++++".

 This thread is absurd and leads nowhere.


 Rust has its own name, they don't have to follow any idea.
 D has chosen to use the naming scheme of C and as such it should be
 honest and use D++ because that's what D is: An expanded version of the
 former language.


D was originally called Mars.
No the community choose to call it D, we're not renaming.
Mar 10 2017
prev sibling parent reply Bastiaan Veelo <Bastiaan Veelo.net> writes:
On Friday, 10 March 2017 at 15:16:56 UTC, Traktor TOni wrote:

 D has chosen to use the naming scheme of C and as such it 
 should be honest and use D++ because that's what D is: An 
 expanded version of the former language.


"D is C++ done right", that used to be one of D's slogans. It 
doesn't mean that is sees itself as being branched off of C++ 
though. I see it as being branched off of C, with similar 
intentions as had Bjarne Stroustrup, but making better choices 
and thereby, arguably, taking a bigger leap forward. So, I think 
"D" fits perfectly, any "++" suffix makes no sense to me.

You say D is an expanded version of C++. I think it's more an 
expanded version of C, surpassing C++.
Mar 10 2017
parent reply =?UTF-8?Q?Ali_=c3=87ehreli?= <acehreli yahoo.com> writes:
On 03/10/2017 10:48 AM, Bastiaan Veelo wrote:


 You say D is an expanded version of C++. I think it's more an expanded
 version of C, surpassing C++.


C++11 was a big step forward for C++ that closed the gap with D. At the 
time, it felt to me like they copied everything from D but now I know 
that programming language ideas are everywhere and it's hard to pinpoint 
who borrowed what from whom.

Regarding the name, I propose "1F44D  THUMBS UP SIGN" but it's not in 
common fonts yet. :o)

import std.stdio;

void main() {
     // Repeat the character according to excitement level
     writeln("D\U0001f44d");
}

Ali
Mar 10 2017
parent reply Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQ=?= writes:
On Friday, 10 March 2017 at 19:15:49 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:

 C++11 was a big step forward for C++ that closed the gap with 
 D. At the time, it felt to me like they copied everything from 
 D but now I know that programming language ideas are everywhere 
 and it's hard to pinpoint who borrowed what from whom.


It is rather obvious that D2 leans heavily on pre-C++11... Not 
sure what C++11 would have borrowed from D though.
Mar 10 2017
parent reply =?UTF-8?Q?Ali_=c3=87ehreli?= <acehreli yahoo.com> writes:
On 03/10/2017 11:43 AM, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote:

 On Friday, 10 March 2017 at 19:15:49 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:

 C++11 was a big step forward for C++ that closed the gap with D. At
 the time, it felt to me like they copied everything from D but now I
 know that programming language ideas are everywhere and it's hard to
 pinpoint who borrowed what from whom.


 It is rather obvious that D2 leans heavily on pre-C++11... Not sure what
 C++11 would have borrowed from D though.


Browsing here:

   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C%2B%2B11

- constexpr (a poor man's CTFE)
- Type inference
- Range-based for
- Lambdas
- Ability to call constructors from constructors
- (Not sure about D timeline here) Explicit overrides and final
- Null pointer constant
- Strongly typed enumerations
- Explicit conversion operators
- Template aliases
- Variadic templates
- ...

At this point it feels like copying almost the entire list so I stop. :)

Ali
Mar 10 2017
parent reply Ola Fosheim =?UTF-8?B?R3LDuHN0YWQ=?= writes:
On Friday, 10 March 2017 at 19:53:52 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:

 - constexpr (a poor man's CTFE)
 - Type inference
 - Range-based for
 - Lambdas


As far as I can tell C++11 was mostly an absorption of existing 
practices, largely syntactical in nature. Lambdas are only 
syntactical sugar over function objects (which  in turn is a weak 
version of Beta patterns, a language Bjarne most certainly knew 
of as he has complained about someone running off with his book 
on the language and the fact  that he shows a lot of respect for 
Kristen Nygaard). The for loop was pure syntactical sugar over 
STL iterators, on the level of a C-macro...


 - (Not sure about D timeline here) Explicit overrides and final


Beta has it.


 - Null pointer constant


Simula. Which C++ is a direct descendant of.


 At this point it feels like copying almost the entire list so I 
 stop. :)


Well, the only big thing in C++11 was standardization of 
ownership mechanisms and getting more compact syntax for function 
objects (lambdas).

The C++ language semantics didn't change much IMO. The idioms has 
changed a lot though. Although it isn't as visible in the 
codebases on github yet...
Mar 10 2017
parent reply XavierAP <n3minis-git yahoo.es> writes:
On Friday, 10 March 2017 at 20:31:59 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad 
wrote:

 On Friday, 10 March 2017 at 19:53:52 UTC, Ali Çehreli wrote:

 - constexpr (a poor man's CTFE)
 - Type inference
 - Range-based for
 - Lambdas


 As far as I can tell C++11 was mostly an absorption of existing 
 practices, largely syntactical in nature. Lambdas are only 
 syntactical sugar over function objects (which  in turn is a 
 weak version of Beta patterns, a language Bjarne most certainly 
 knew of as he has complained about someone running off with his 
 book on the language and the fact  that he shows a lot of 
 respect for Kristen Nygaard). The for loop was pure syntactical 
 sugar over STL iterators, on the level of a C-macro...


IMHO... Only from a typical C++ centric perspective can it be 
claimed that C++11 and higher have not copied (not from D which 
was most of the time not first). The fact that these features are 
theorized outside of languages doesn't mean that the last 
language to implement them can claim the same originality as the 
first. And everything can be called "syntactic sugar" over 
assembly, nay machine code.

etc years before C++

D has copied these from other languages/theories as well, but the 
language has been designed from the beginning to accommodate 
them. And yes often D has implemented them first, which can only 
be blamed on C++ itself. C++ was designed to be a superset of C 
including pre-processor, without any foresight, and the can has 
been kicked down the road since -- and each time it could be 
kicked only with the approval of an ISO committee.
Mar 10 2017
parent Ola Fosheim Grostad <ola.fosheim.grostad gmail.com> writes:
On Friday, 10 March 2017 at 23:00:16 UTC, XavierAP wrote:

 IMHO... Only from a typical C++ centric perspective can it be 
 claimed that C++11 and higher have not copied (not from D which 
 was most of the time not first).


Neither C++ or D have any significant original features.


 the first. And everything can be called "syntactic sugar" over 
 assembly, nay machine code.


This isn't right though. Modern C++ has added some semantic 
additions and adjustments to enable new patterns (or stricter 
typing).


 And yes often D has implemented them first, which can only be 
 blamed on C++ itself. C++ was designed to be


Not sure what you mean. Features are proposed decades before they 
get standardized and gets implemented as experimental features as 
well, often years before. In general a standardization process 
expects multiple independent implementations to exist before 
acceptance...


 time it could be kicked only with the approval of an ISO 
 committee.


Not really, there are multiple non standard features in all the 
C++ compilers and people use them. Each of those compilers are 
more widespread than D, so if you want a fair conparison you'd 
have to compare the dialects and not an ISO standard (which 
always will be a shared subset of the implementations)
Mar 10 2017
prev sibling parent Andrea Fontana <nospam example.com> writes:
On Friday, 10 March 2017 at 14:29:27 UTC, Chris wrote:

 According to Wikipedia, D was influenced by:





According to italian wikipedia instead:
Mar 10 2017
prev sibling parent XavierAP <n3minis-git yahoo.es> writes:
http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/233/260/687.jpg

ok I'll bite 0:)

On Friday, 10 March 2017 at 14:19:17 UTC, Traktor TOni wrote:

 My point is that D is much more like C++ than it is like C


Exactly. So that you understand, let's say "C" means "horse", 
"C++" means "cyborg wheeled horse", and "D" means "car"

https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8193/8148618536_2128988e76.jpg
Mar 10 2017
prev sibling next sibling parent reply Abdulhaq <alynch4047 gmail.com> writes:
On Friday, 10 March 2017 at 11:25:11 UTC, Traktor TOni wrote:

 I think the name is just misleading, the D developers should at 
 least be honest with themselves.


well the tractor derives from the shire horse and Toni comes from 
Antonius so you should be honest too and rename yourself to 
Shirehorse++ Antonius--.
Mar 10 2017
parent reply Traktor TOni <trustthesky gmail.com> writes:
On Friday, 10 March 2017 at 15:33:14 UTC, Abdulhaq wrote:

 On Friday, 10 March 2017 at 11:25:11 UTC, Traktor TOni wrote:

 I think the name is just misleading, the D developers should 
 at least be honest with themselves.


 well the tractor derives from the shire horse and Toni comes 
 from Antonius so you should be honest too and rename yourself 
 to Shirehorse++ Antonius--.


Please stop spamming my thread with joke responses.
Mar 10 2017
parent reply Jack Stouffer <jack jackstouffer.com> writes:
On Friday, 10 March 2017 at 16:08:15 UTC, Traktor TOni wrote:

 Please stop spamming my thread with joke responses.


When you play stupid games, you win stupid prizes.

"Hey everyone, why don't you completely abandon 15+ years of 
building your brand on the name D and change it to D++, which 
will inevitably lead to confusion by almost everyone? Why? 
Because I think you should!"

Simple answer: no.

Only expect meaningful replies to threads with meaning.
Mar 10 2017
parent "H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d" <digitalmars-d puremagic.com> writes:
On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 05:11:39PM +0000, Jack Stouffer via Digitalmars-d wrote:
[...]

 Only expect meaningful replies to threads with meaning.


As the geek would say:

	ASCII stupid question, getty stupid ANSI.

:-D


T

-- 
EMACS = Extremely Massive And Cumbersome System
Mar 10 2017
prev sibling next sibling parent reply meppl <mephisto nordhoff-online.de> writes:
On Friday, 10 March 2017 at 11:25:11 UTC, Traktor TOni wrote:

 I think the name is just misleading, the D developers should at 
 least be honest with themselves.


look here:  
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C_(programming_language)#History

so, once upon a day there was _A_ssembler. then a language of the 
name "B" was created. later a successor language was created - 
called "C".

it happened that someone was not satisfied with "C", but didnt 
really want to abandon "C". thats why he created a superset of 
"C" and called it "C++".  a "C" with more capabilities.  (thats 
probably not 100% true, but still pretty much the meaning of the 
name).

another person was not satisfied and created another successor. 
"D" was born. "D" abandoned compatibility with "C" - more than 
"C++" did. also, "D" is ment to be a successor of C/C++. but "D" 
is not a (C++)++ or C+2, also not a C++, because its not a 
superset, since it breaks compatibility to the predecessors

in that context, i think the name is _not misleading_:  A B C C++ 
_D_
Mar 11 2017
parent Patrick Schluter <Patrick.Schluter bbox.fr> writes:
On Saturday, 11 March 2017 at 10:32:02 UTC, meppl wrote:

 On Friday, 10 March 2017 at 11:25:11 UTC, Traktor TOni wrote:

 I think the name is just misleading, the D developers should 
 at least be honest with themselves.


 look here:  
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C_(programming_language)#History

 so, once upon a day there was _A_ssembler. then a language of 
 the name "B" was created. later a successor language was 
 created - called "C".

 it happened that someone was not satisfied with "C", but didnt 
 really want to abandon "C". thats why he created a superset of 
 "C" and called it "C++".  a "C" with more capabilities.  (thats 
 probably not 100% true, but still pretty much the meaning of 
 the name).

 another person was not satisfied and created another successor. 
 "D" was born. "D" abandoned compatibility with "C" - more than 
 "C++" did. also, "D" is ment to be a successor of C/C++. but 
 "D" is not a (C++)++ or C+2, also not a C++, because its not a 
 superset, since it breaks compatibility to the predecessors

 in that context, i think the name is _not misleading_:  A B C 
 C++ _D_


Yeah, we could say that D is an alias of ++C. i.e. the result of 
the increment. As C++ is the operation of incrementing but 
returning the old value. The day they will have achieved their 
incrementation they will realise that they now have reached where 
D is already ;-)

Don't take that too seriously, these dick wagging posts are 
generally not very productive and indeed can paint people in a 
unpleasant way.
Mar 11 2017
prev sibling parent reply Kagamin <spam here.lot> writes:
D••
:D
Mar 11 2017
parent reply Ali <izoz martin.securehost.com.es> writes:
On Saturday, 11 March 2017 at 15:27:50 UTC, Kagamin wrote:

 D••
 :D


thanks for sharing 
https://img.memesuper.com/9d0f96eb3d5a68cff0a3dd357957895b_muahaha-muahaha-meme_625-833.jpeg
Mar 30 2017
parent Chris <wendlec tcd.ie> writes:
On Friday, 31 March 2017 at 06:40:51 UTC, Ali wrote:

 On Saturday, 11 March 2017 at 15:27:50 UTC, Kagamin wrote:

 D••
 :D


 thanks for sharing 
 https://img.memesuper.com/9d0f96eb3d5a68cff0a3dd357957895b_muahaha-muahaha-meme_625-833.jpeg


So if your first child is called, say, Ali, your second child 
will be called Ali++. :-) The Romans actually had that naming 
scheme: Primus, Secundus ...
Mar 31 2017