Why aren't you using D at work?

[Rikki Cattermole via Digitalmars-d]

On 31/05/2015 2:27 p.m., H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On Sun, May 31, 2015 at 02:17:59PM +1200, Rikki Cattermole via Digitalmars-d wrote:
>> On 31/05/2015 11:37 a.m., Danni Coy via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> [...]
>>> The Standard Library. I want to use D so I can do more with less
>>> hours writing code and less hours debugging code. Having a high
>>> quality standard library really helps this - unfortunately for me the
>>> first thing I needed from the standard library was xml parsing, which
>>> the documentation tells me is sub par and will be replaced in the
>>> near future, There is no indication of what I might like to use
>>> instead. Do I now use one of the other xml libraries floating around,
>>> bind a C based one or roll my own. All this eats into the efficiency
>>> that I am gaining by virtue of D being a really nice language.
>>>
>>
>>
>> Ahh std.xml, it's been that way for years.
>> We NEED to get that replaced. Although don't hold your breath :/
>
> What we *really* need, like almost everything else in D, is for somebody
> to get sufficiently provoked by the sorry state of the current std.xml
> to write something better and push it through the review process. Until
> then, further discussion is unlikely to make any difference.
>
>
> T
>

That's a given at this stage.
I've read the XML spec, its almost as bad as x86. Okay not quite but 
still. That's how far I got.