Still not D standard yet ?

[Jonathan M Davis via Digitalmars-d-learn]

On Saturday, November 29, 2014 10:35:32 bachmeier via Digitalmars-d-learn wrote:
> On Saturday, 29 November 2014 at 09:03:13 UTC, Ledd wrote:
> > Do you really think that a "system language", or just a
> > language that aims to be popular, can possibly discard the idea
> > of getting into an international standard ?
> >
> > I still can't recall any major language that doesn't have a
> > standard, what is the language/s you are thinking about ?
>
> C was standardized in 1989. C++ was standardized in 1998. I'm
> unaware of ISO (or any other) standardization for Go, Python,
> Perl, Objective C, or PHP. And as I recall there is no ISO
> standard Java, and only for some old version of C#.
>
> ISO standardization is very expensive. D is not even close to the
> popularity level necessary to begin thinking about that.

According to wikipedia, this is the list:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Programming_languages_with_an_ISO_standard

There aren't very many on the list, and most of them aren't used in serious
production at this point. An ISO standard isn't even vaguely necessary for a
language to succeed. It might be nice to have, but it's not required. Maybe
someday, D will have an ISO standard, but at this point, our energies are
best directed elsewhere. And not all aspects of the language are set in
stone anyway. Yes, it's far more stable than it used to be, and we're trying
very hard to avoid breaking existing code, but some features may require
reworking to work the way we need them to, which could break code (e.g.
shared is on the list of things that we need to rework on some level).
Standarizing the language at this stage would harm those efforts, and we'd
end up with a worse language as a result.

- Jonathan M Davis