D as A Better C?

[ed]

On Tuesday, 11 February 2014 at 21:13:58 UTC, Peter Alexander 
wrote:
[snip]
> Remember, D1 was just D2 without a bunch of features and we had 
> to discontinue that because it was taking too much time to 
> maintain. How will this be different?

It is different because this D-core is the one D-core of D2 used 
in D-runtime and Phobobs. It is simply a subset of the D2 core 
language and not a mini-D developed in parallel.

I think it would be useful in the embedded world especially. It 
may also help shrink Phobos down to be as small as possible and 
avoid the GC where it is important.

Anyway, that's my take on the proposal.

Cheers,
ed