Vision document for H1 2018

[Dylan Graham]

On Saturday, 10 March 2018 at 11:07:56 UTC, psychoticRabbit wrote:
> On Saturday, 10 March 2018 at 10:47:09 UTC, Dylan Graham wrote:
>>
>> Yeah. Why should D worry about tying itself into C when it 
>> can't even interface with itself through DLLs?
>
> A reasonable point.
>
> But.. in any case.. people work on what they are motivated to 
> work on.
>
> That's really all there is to it.
>
> That's how the open source community works.
>
> Top down, corporate direction, simply does not apply here.
>
> One day you (or some other D programmer) might need betterC - 
> who knows - and it'll be there for you - cause someone else was 
> motivated to do it.

Well, no. I'm more concerned with the fact that the D Language 
Foundation is focused on BetterC, yet does not mention DLLs at 
all.

For God's sake, if D is the future, why does it continue to leech 
off C/C++? Other languages like Rust and C# only have basic 
function calling C (FFI/PInvoke) yet are way more popular. I get 
the feeling that most of the C++ programmers who would come to D 
have already done so.

The most I'll ever need of interfacing with C and C++ is to be 
able to call their functions from D. I've no reason for BetterC.

And what's with the language design, anyway? D has been designed 
with features that C++ programmers don't want, then now the D 
Language Foundation is wasting effort to change the language to 
rope those programmers in? If D was meant to be C++ 2.0, 
shouldn't it have been designed that way from the start?

I came to D from a C# background. I was looking a language that 
had a GC, was awesome to program in and was very fast. Why can't 
D own up to these facts, rather than becoming a leech of C++?

Every day D becomes more like C++ 2.0, why can't it just be D?