The proper case for D.

[BCS]

Reply to Steve,

> When Bjarne Stroustrup was originally promoting C++, he made a strong
> point that you could at least consider it to be a 'better C'. This
> point, it seemed to me, was lost on many. Now we are looking for
> radical arguments as to why D is a cool language. Maybe we should
> remember the basics, and concentrate less on the vapor.

"D is a low level language that can masquerade as a high level language" 
It has the low level stuff but if you just choose not to use them it looks 
and to a great extent acts like a high level one.

> Bearophile made a counter-argument. But this also did not stress our
> basic weaknesses. Most of us are using DMD, which on Windows uses a 20
> year old linker, and utilizes an antique object file format.

DMD now has 3 (or is it 4) different object file outputters. it shouldn't 
be hard from somone who knows somthing about a better format to be able to 
figure out how to patch one in and send Walter a patch.

> or perhaps it should be the D Standard Library (DSL).

No, DSL is already used. DSR? D standard runtime?