>>37
Glossing over the fact that you can't really check types very well in the first place, and for the third time: everything that isn't a type can't be checked.
Thats an understatement to say you cant check types well in C++ because C++ is an extremely weakly typed. By that I mean C++ only knows a variable is of a certain type because you assign it that type, it has no other way to find out the type. So whether there are only a few types or if you make C++ richly typed with encapsulating with classes and templates, it will still be a weakly typed language.
So this is where D comes in, D adds dynamic typing, type inference, garbage collection, safe and volatile sections of code. It does a lot of what
>>43 layed out without having to do it all from scratch. This is why I crack up that everyone shoots down D for being just another gimmick language just because it was written by an unknown compiler writer. Everyone seems to have a religious devotion to C++ to the point that features to make the language safe become more complex than the base syntax by orders of magnitude. The only thing stupider than the devotion to C++ is all the people who crawl back into the C womb in reaction to what has to be done to make C++ safe.