Current state of "D as a better C" (Windows)?

[Dejan Lekic]

On Saturday, 25 January 2014 at 22:15:29 UTC, Frank Bauer wrote:
> D is NOT a systems language. So no point in application level
> comparison with C. Set aside syntactic similarities.
>
> If your language does not have the C / C++ *semantics* of new /
> delete, or, better yet, owned pointers in Rust that 
> automatically
> free their memory when they go out of scope, but instead forces 
> a
> GC down your throat for some of the most basic array and 
> standard
> library functionality, you will never, ever write kernel level
> code that stands a chance against C, C++ or Rust.
>
> Other than that, a "D with owned pointers" and an opt-in GC
> relegated to a library implementation (maybe with some minimal
> language hooks) would be my language of choice. I love D's
> templates.
>
> I understand that this would be a complete redesign of the
> language and Phobos, and would break most of the D code out
> there. That's why it won't happen.
>
> Everybody seems to realize this, finally. Just have a look at 
> the
> last (long) GC thread. Comparisons of D with Java and C# all 
> over.

This post made me laugh. Thanks for the entertainment.