Who favors the current D1 situation?

[Alexander Panek]

Bill Baxter wrote:
> Currently as we all know, D1 gets no new features, and D2 is a crazy 
> rocketship that could change direction at any moment.
> 
> Now I know a lot of people were asking for D to become more stable pre 
> D1 days, but is this really what you wanted?

I appreciate the fact that D1 is stable. But it seems a bit too "stable" 
(as in not moving) to me, somehow. AFAIK, there are still a lot of 
long-standing bugs around, the toolchain is still kind of immature 
and/or outdated. I understand that Walter as a single person can't 
possibly reimplement parts of the toolchain while maintaining the 
compilers, but then again, what about delegation?

The D community has shown to be a bunch of pretty (very) knowledgable 
people. A little delegation here and there would get Walter some time to 
work on new features and the community some opportunity to properly 
polish D1 with all its tools.

Another thing I'm eager for is a reimplementation of the D1 reference 
compiler in D1 (DMD D1). This would be a huge step forward for D, 
besides from Walter actually using D. The toolchain still feels somewhat 
like a prototype to me..

(Out of interest: how hard would it be to plug a D frontend to the 
current DMD backend? Would it even be possible?)