Moving back to .NET

[Chris via Digitalmars-d]

On Friday, 25 September 2015 at 14:21:56 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad 
wrote:
> On Friday, 25 September 2015 at 13:54:40 UTC, Chris wrote:
>> full-fledged IDE, there would be other concerns (or excuses). 
>> D scares people away. It's too raw, too bare bones, everything 
>> is still moving like hot lava, and maybe people are 
>> intimidated by
>
> Yes, stability is important for commercial development. I 
> notice some people say that you can just lock yourself to a 
> particular compiler, but this does not work. Not even for C++. 
> Yesterday I had to upgrade to a more recent version of clang 
> just to get a library to work, which used some C++14 features.
>
> Yet, it would be a tragedy for D to freeze on backwards 
> compatibility like C++ has done. Rust and D has the advantage 
> that they can move forward faster than C++. Having lots of 
> commerical development in D right now would just be a drag, IMO.

The funny thing is that people demand that D be changed, else 
they won't use it. And at the same time they claim they don't use 
it, because it changes too fast.