The current status of D?

[Alex Rønne Petersen]

On 07-12-2011 09:16, Don wrote:
> On 06.12.2011 09:37, bearophile wrote:
>> Don:
>>
>>> Right. But it's hard to come up with high-priority language issues
>>> these days. The old ones have been fixed.<g>.<
>>
>> There are several things that I'd like to see fixed/improved in D still.
>
> Yes, of course. But most of the showstoppers are done.
> Not so long ago there were major features in the spec or in TDPL that
> weren't implemented at all - contracts, @safe, pure, inout, TDPL
> operator overloading, almost nothing worked in CTFE, Phobos didn't
> compile on 64 bits, ...

Speaking of contracts, what are the plans for:

* Supporting contracts in interfaces - sometimes the compiler will not 
allow this, claiming that a method body must be present (other times it 
Just Works)
* this pointer adjustment in interface contracts - using other interface 
members in an interface contract currently crashes because the this 
pointer isn't adjusted correctly
* Supporting pre-state (AKA 'old')
* Supporting contracts specific to exceptional function exit

? These are all rather essential to have usable contract programming, 
probably most significantly the interface ones.

- Alex