Does D have too many features?

[SomeDude]

On Saturday, 28 April 2012 at 20:51:54 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
> On Sat, Apr 28, 2012 at 10:08:29PM +0200, SomeDude wrote:
>> On Saturday, 28 April 2012 at 20:02:12 UTC, q66 wrote:
>> >On Saturday, 28 April 2012 at 19:57:08 UTC, SomeDude wrote:
>> >>On Saturday, 28 April 2012 at 19:23:00 UTC, q66 wrote:
>> >
>> >So you don't agree version() is horribly half assed without 
>> >AND/OR
>> >(how do you generate the same code for two different versions
>> >without copying or creating a new version covering both cases
>> >then?) and that "version = FOO;" makes no sense?
>> 
>> Sorry, with that, I agree. Nick Sabalausky proposed to remove
>> version entirely.
>> But I agree there could be something like:
>> version(LINUX|OSX){
>> ...
>> } else {
>> ...
>> }
>
> But if you're gonna do that, might as well just fold the 
> feature into
> static if. The point of having a separate version construct was 
> to
> provide a very basic, simple, easy-to-implement and easy-to-use 
> way of
> versioning stuff. I don't think it was ever intended to be a
> full-fledged versioning system.
>
>
> T

I really don't care how it's implemented or what its syntax is. 
What I do want is begin able with a single glimpse, to see the 
different versions of the code, without having the impression to 
plunge into a "static if hell" with 5 levels of indentation. 
Having a different keyword helps for this. Besides, a specific 
keyword makes parsing code easier.