What's missing to make D2 feature complete?

[Dejan Lekic via Digitalmars-d]

On Saturday, 20 December 2014 at 17:40:06 UTC, Martin Nowak wrote:
> Just wondering what the general sentiment is.
>
> For me it's these 3 points.
>
> - tuple support (DIP32, maybe without pattern matching)
> - working import, protection and visibility rules (DIP22, 313, 
> 314)
> - finishing non-GC memory management

There is no "feature complete" language. What makes mainstream 
languages more likely candidates for future software projects is 
the fact that they are properly maintained by a team of 
professionals language community trusts.

I can give Java and C++ as perfect examples. (I am doing this 
mostly because these two are what I used most of the time in my 
professional career)
- None of them is "feature complete", yet they are most likely 
candidate languages for many future software projects. Why? I 
believe the major reason why is that there is a well-defined 
standardization process, and what is more important, there are 
companies behind these languages. Naturally, this makes the new 
features come to the language *extremely slowly* (we talk 10+ 
years here).

Perhaps the best course of action is to extract the stable 
features that D has now, and fork a stable branch that is 
maintained by people who are actually using that stable version 
of D in *their products*. This is crucial because it is in their 
own interest to have this branch as stable as possible.

"Problem" with D is that it is pragmatic language, and this 
"problem" is why I love D. The reason I say it is a problem is 
because there are subcommunities and people with their own view 
on how things "should be". Examples are numerous: GC vs noGC, 
functional vs OOP, pro- and anti- heavily templated D code. Point 
is - it is hard to satisfy all.