Rust and D

[Peter Alexander]

On Saturday, 29 September 2012 at 10:27:26 UTC, Nick Sabalausky 
wrote:
> If he were talking about some minor insignificant feature, then 
> I agree
> it'd be goofy to reject a language solely because of that. But 
> that's
> not what's happening. Generics are a major thing. Many people 
> *do* find
> them to make a big difference.

So, with this in mind, do you think these hypothetical people are 
all justified?

(a) [Go programmer]: D is rubbish because it doesn't have 
channels.
(b) [Lisp programmer]: D is rubbish because it doesn't have 
homoiconicity.
(c) [Haskell programmer]: D is rubbish because it doesn't have 
full type inference.

All of those things are considered "a major thing" by their 
users, and many people do find them to "make a big difference."

My question to you: Is it okay to reject D solely with these 
arguments? If not, how is this any different from rejecting Go 
solely from its lack of generics?