Stable D version?

[eles]

On Monday, 29 April 2013 at 07:44:15 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
> On Monday, 29 April 2013 at 06:45:32 UTC, eles wrote:
> D is simply in no shape to compete for kernels for same reasons 
> it is rather painful to use in embedded (fat runtime, language 
> features relying on hidden gc allocations etc.) It is hardly 
> practical to discuss the moment to compete when it is not an 
> option from technical point of view.

Well, then a list of what's still missing should be compiled (in 
terms of features and language changes, not in terms of bugs). An 
rush to complete it.

Some of the issues were discussed since many months, and no 
definitive decision has been taken (see the @property).

I am rather in favor of taking a decision, good or bad, than to 
prolonge ambiguity. Also for several minor issues (ie: double[$] 
static arrays and __MODULE__ identifier and so on).

For those, I would like to see a more accelerated pace.

I even start thinking that is better to release a new feature 
after a relative short, preliminary discussion, and be prepared 
to change it during a time frame, if it is not as practical as 
desired, instead of prolonging a discussion for centuries in the 
search of the perfect implementation.