Difference between revisions of "Language issues"
(Added Null References) |
(added another discussion link to null references) |
||
| Line 40: | Line 40: | ||
* [http://forum.dlang.org/post/vgntbohxwfnglyiyxgmi@forum.dlang.org February 2014 discussion] | * [http://forum.dlang.org/post/vgntbohxwfnglyiyxgmi@forum.dlang.org February 2014 discussion] | ||
| + | * [http://forum.dlang.org/post/vhtcmmnihixpmaqtakmg@forum.dlang.org September 2012 discussion] | ||
Revision as of 23:20, 11 March 2014
Like any programming language, D is not perfect. This page lists some potential problems that have been brought up and debated throughout the language's history. Fixing these is not straight-forward or may not justify breaking backwards-compatibility. As of the moment of writing this, there are no plans for a major revision of D which would allow such breaking changes, but this list may also be useful for other programming languages which wish to learn from D's experience.
See also: Language design discussions
Properties
Design of properties has been an oft-discussed topic. This language feature has evolved throughout D's history (e.g. the addition and removal of the -property switch. There are numerous DIPs with proposals on improving the design:
See also:
Unicode and ranges
D's ranges currently treat strings in a special way: they present them as a range of code points, thus implicitly performing UTF decoding. Algorithms that do not require working with decoded code points, and which would gain a performance advantage by treating the input as a range of code units (or an array of code units), must incorporate D strings as a special case. This approach complicates the implementation by some degree, and only solves a certain subset of problems for a subset of written languages.
See also:
Signed/unsigned comparisons
(What's the status of this? Issue 259 is open and has an open pull request.)
Null References
{Please add summary}
See also:
