If D becomes a failure, what's the key reason, do you think?

[BCS]

In article <e8olc3$12i4$2 at digitaldaemon.com>, Sean Kelly says...
>Don Clugston wrote:
>> 
>> I think it's a two-step process. My opinion:
>> Announce a 1.0 feature freeze immediately. Don't actually announce DMD 
>> 1.0 until the regressions related to protection are fixed. A 1.0 
>> announcement is a major public relations opportunity (one of the biggest 
>> the language will get), it's important to avoid a PR disaster. But 
>> internally, we can view 0.162 as DMD 1.0 RC1.
>
>Agreed.  As soon as the feature list for 1.0 is decided and any 
>contentious issues have been resolved (ie. the visibility issue being 
>discussed now) I think an announced feature freeze would be the proper 
>first step towards a 1.0 release.  Compiler bugs could continue to be 
>worked on, and perhaps a joint effort could be made to fill out the spec 
>in places it's either confusing or sparse.
>
>
>Sean

How about feature-freeze NOW at what is in DMD already and things that are under
major discussion?

Reference:
http://www.digitalmars.com/drn-bin/wwwnews?digitalmars.D/39770

Only one of the sighted is a feature (const) the other is semantic adjustment of
a pre existing feature.