What are the worst parts of D?

[Brad Roberts via Digitalmars-d]

On 9/23/2014 9:46 PM, Sean Kelly via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> There's clearly been a lot of attention paid to bug fixes.  But for the
> rest... I feel like the overall direction is towards whatever is
> currently thought to gain the most new users.  The thing is that D has
> already *got* me.  What I want is for the language I've already got to
> be polished until I can use it in a freaking space telescope.  I'm sick
> of "yes but" languages. Every time I hit an obstacle in D I think "oh
> great, D is way behind other languages in all these ways and D itself is
> broken to boot.  Why am I using this again?"  And it could be a tiny
> thing.  It doesn't matter.  Every little issue like that is magnified a
> thousandfold because D is already such a hard sell.

I agree with Sean quite a bit here.

Let's turn the camera around and look at it from a different angle.  I'm 
hard pressed to find a new feature from the last few years that's 
actually thoroughly complete.  And by complete I mean that druntime and 
phobos use it everywhere it should be used.

Shared libraries?  nope.
Any of the new attributes?  nope.
64 bit support?  nope.
const?
shared?
cleaning up object?

.. nope.

And that's not even getting into the big gaps that exist.

I understand quite thoroughly why c++ support is a big win, or will be, 
but the Oh Shiny focus is pretty discouraging for me as well.  This 
isn't meant to say the c++ work shouldn't be done, but to point out that 
the shifting focus is a real problem.