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

[Georg Wrede]

Dave wrote:
> Good points, but as with everything there is a tradeoff between polish 
> and release and IMHO there's been just about enough polish. I think the 
> general consensus is that D is currently good enough *if*: The import 
> usability issues and the broken/inconsistent protection attribute issues 
> are taken care of.
> 
> There are also some who'd like some form of 'const' but the trick is or 
> will be to make that better than what C++ offers (and readily 
> implementable). Heck, I'd be happier than a pig in mud if we could also 
> get some form of 'const' reference-type function arguments, but that can 
> wait for v1.1 if need be <g>

Couldn't have said it better!