D as A Better C?

[eles]

On Tuesday, 11 February 2014 at 22:19:13 UTC, Gary Willoughby 
wrote:
> On Tuesday, 11 February 2014 at 19:43:00 UTC, Walter Bright 
> wrote:

> What will this language's niche be? What job is it targeted at?

My job (realtime embedded Linux).

> Why would somebody use better C rather than just plain C?

If you send me to a C compiler, why bother to evangelize me D? I 
have C# and Java for all the other uses that are not embedded.

Please, stop telling about "alternatives". It is like taking 
aways D's very reason of existence.

If is just an application language, it loses. There are better 
and better-supported out there on the market.

But there is no better systems programming language.

System programming language means being able to write the 
druntime in it. Without relying on, well, druntime.

If you keep telling "you could use C for that", then, well, I 
could use C instead of D everywhere, just plain and simple, just 
as I already do today. In that case, sorry, neither me neither my 
boss, we are not interested in a Java clone. We don't have space 
for the virtual machine (oh, call it runtime...).

And, as you say, we could just use C. Or that embedded subset of 
C++. Speaking about subsets, by the way...