why a part of D community do not want go to D2 ?

[Walter Bright]

Tobias Pfaff wrote:
> 1. Bitter fighting about a possible non-nullable type for D3(!).
> Discussion style: "Noone will take away my right to write unsafe code !" 
> vs. "Down with the reckless cowboy coders". Are we discussing guns or 
> coding here?
> That, and purposedly overhearing the other's real point.

I don't know that it's bitter, "spirited" might be a better term. I like 
spirited discussions.


> 2. Tango vs. Phobos. Wow. I really really wished we were over that by 
> now. It's been like two years since I last looked in here, and still the 
> same thing.
> 
> So, while I like the language and will probably stick around here 
> anyway, it might me a good thing to avoid this experience for other 
> people interested in D peeking into the newsgroup. Also, with (2), I 
> don't really get the point here. Whatever exactly happend between the 
> tango/phobos fraction -- the best thing to do to get everyone on board 
> again is probably to just to make phobos2 a library everyone enjoys to 
> use. And avoid starting discussions on who did what wrong over and over.
> And while still lacking a few of the high-level features of Tango 
> (higher level network, streaming, etc.) it feels like the direction is 
> right.

I agree. The reasons for the Tango split long ago, whatever the merit of those 
reasons was, have long since passed. Producing another incompatible split with 
D2 will not be of an advantage to anyone, and will just give people reasons not 
to use D at all.

Jacob has recently decided to help out with improvements to druntime; I take 
that as a very welcome sign towards ending the differences.


> With all that been said, I'm looking forward to using D for a while, 
> after fighting the C++ template code monster for the last years.

Great!