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

[Dicebot via Digitalmars-d]

On Saturday, 20 December 2014 at 19:11:53 UTC, Vic wrote:
> Second smaller thing I 'elude' to but don't verbalize in that 
> argument is my personal preference for a smaller language. Less 
> is better/faster.

I think this is the main reason why we have different perspective 
on necessity of change. Smaller language simply means that you 
need to put more complexity into actual applications and while D 
looks all cool at the first glance trying to get deeper (== 
implement BIG projects) inevitably makes you encounter 
fundamental design quirks that affect maintenance costs. Deadlnix 
has provided pretty good list of suck problematic points.

While there is some value in splitting the spec into core 
language and extensions I don't believe it is wise for D to 
compete in simplicity domain.