D 2015/2016 Vision?

[Kagamin via Digitalmars-d]

On Thursday, 8 October 2015 at 14:13:30 UTC, Jonathan M Davis 
wrote:
> I've programmed extensively in C++ with smart pointers, and in 
> my experience, circular references are rarely a problem. There 
> are some cases where it's obvious that you have one (e.g. where 
> one object owns another and they need to talk to each other), 
> in which case you either use a normal pointer or a weak 
> reference, depending on which makes more sense. And in the 
> cases that you don't catch, you find them in testing, figure 
> out what should be a weak reference to get rid of the circular 
> dependency, you fix it, and you move on. It really isn't a big 
> deal in general, though I suppose that there could be certain 
> ways of designing programs where it would be more problematic.

That's all understandable. What's not understandable is when one 
insists that a necessity to figure out ownership for every 
non-resource object in C++ is superior to D.