How is the D programming language financed?

[Jeff Nowakowski]

On 12/27/2010 02:16 PM, Andrei Alexandrescu wrote:
>
> There's a risk on this newsgroup to get stuck in a sort of limbo mode,
> in which the analysis of increasingly narrow corner cases loses focus on
> a few larger issues. Granted, we _must_ leave no nooks and crannies
> unexplored, but we also shouldn't spend disproportionate amounts of time
> on those at the expense of getting work done in D.

Funny, I thought the people trying to write const correct libraries and 
multithreaded programs were trying to get work done in D. Immutability 
was supposed to be the crown jewel of D2. Given your past statements, 
and the recent statements backing down on immutability, especially as it 
is used in Phobos, a thought occurred to me:

Rename D2 to Icarus, backport the "amazing", working parts of D2 to D1, 
and rename that to C++0x. Everybody wins.

Sorry to pick on you, Andrei, but with leadership comes responsibility. 
I also believe in truth in advertising. Walter can't tout immutability 
as a bullet point if it isn't working, has unresolved design issues, and 
you yourself have backed away from it.