Does D have too many features?

[Nick Sabalausky]

"Nick Sabalausky" <SeeWebsiteToContactMe at semitwist.com> wrote in message 
news:jnit81$29uh$1 at digitalmars.com...
> "SomeDude" <lovelydear at mailmetrash.com> wrote in message 
> news:jrdmqmchgbibqmrwzwsk at forum.dlang.org...
>> On Sunday, 29 April 2012 at 05:54:10 UTC, Marco Leise wrote:
>>> Am Sat, 28 Apr 2012 15:39:49 -0400
>>>
>>> Madness even! AAs are soon mostly in the library and that's a good 
>>> trade-off; @trusted @system needs to be there as long as there is @safe; 
>>> exception handling - some people rely on it heavily. See it as the easy 
>>> way to error out of a function that doesn't normally return anything and 
>>> cascade up several calls, while being able to release resources in each.
>>> I don't know about Phobos. Some batteries included are nice and help the 
>>> popularity. When it comes to bindings to third party products with many 
>>> alternatives, like databases, I'd say one should cut it there definitly.
>>> I can agree on the rest.
>>
>>
>> I don't want AA to be removed from the core language. That would be a big 
>> step backward in my opinion. Core language AAs are entirely adequate for 
>> a lot of applications, and they make for so much cleaner and easier to 
>> read/write code than template notation.
>
> There will still be sugar in the compiler so they appear to be builtins. 
> When the switch happens, I'm sure it'll be transparent - average users 
> probably won't even notice. It's just that "behind the scenes" their 
> implementation will move from DMD to Druntime.
>

In fact, don't regular arrays already work like this?