What is the D plan's to become a used language?

[deadalnix via Digitalmars-d]

On Friday, 19 December 2014 at 11:39:08 UTC, Joakim wrote:
> On Friday, 19 December 2014 at 10:04:34 UTC, Walter Bright 
> wrote:
>> On 12/18/2014 1:39 PM, Vic wrote:
>>> But this is not the culture of the creators. They think 
>>> adding features is fun.
>>
>> I spent most of my time saying "no" to new features and trying 
>> to find ways to support things without adding features.
>
> I think his point is that you haven't said "no" enough. ;) A 
> tough job, but then BDFL doesn't come without its pains.

I don't think the problem is saying no here.

The problem is that many feature are incomplete or have holes or 
are not orthogonal to each others. Let me take 2 simple examples :
  - type qualifiers are transitive. Except for delegate's context.
  - There is no implicit sharing. Except via delegate (because of 
the above mentioned point), exceptions and promotion of pure 
function's result.

The problem with having these holes, is that you can't rely on 
anything. That makes it very hard to write reliable library, or 
to add new features as you get a myriad of special cases all over 
the place.

Sometime, fixing these holes require adding new feature, or 
extending a bit existing ones. That is fine as this new thing 
will allow for closure of what is already open. This is a 
beneficial addition and saying no would be a step back.

In other situations, adding new feature simply extends the 
language and create new specials cases. In which case, no or 
later is the appropriate answer at this point.