• ZILtoid1991@lemmy.worldOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    2 months ago

    I personally prefer the memory safety tools offered by D over Rust. D also doesn’t come with const by default, and you can even opt out of the RAII stuff a certain graphics driver developer boasted about in the Linux developer mailings (RAII can be a bad for optimization).

    • CanadaPlus@futurology.today
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      2 months ago

      I feel like this has come up before, and D is not memory safe. It has some helper-type features, but at the end of the day it is still C-like.

      • ZILtoid1991@lemmy.worldOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 months ago

        Not if you opt in it. You can even put @safe: in the beginning of your D source code, then you’ll have a memory safe D (you have to opt out by using @trusted then @system).

        • CanadaPlus@futurology.today
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          Alright, I’ll actually dive into the research again…

          Oh, I see, D is garbage collected, so really it’s more like Java or Python. Maybe that’s what I’m remembering. Also, @safe code sounds like it’s pretty limited - far more limited than non-unsafe Rust.

          Basically, if a language had been Rust before Rust showed up, Rust would have been a non-event. They solved a problem that was legitimately open at the time.