ISO D

[eugene via Digitalmars-d]

On Wednesday, 17 August 2016 at 08:48:12 UTC, Jonathan M Davis 
wrote:
> On Wednesday, August 17, 2016 08:02:42 eugene via Digitalmars-d 
> wrote:
>> Hello, everyone,
>> will ISO D be in future or not?
>
> The future? Maybe. But it's unlikely to happen soon. As a 
> whole, the language is pretty solid, but there are details that 
> still need to be ironed out spec-wise, there are a few cases 
> where features need to be completed or expanded, and we're 
> likely to be adding a feature or two to solve some of the 
> current problems (e.g. Walter is working on adding ref-counting 
> to the language so that less depends on the GC). So, while D's 
> language definition is _far_ more stable than it once was, it's 
> still in enough flux that a standard wouldn't make a lot of 
> sense yet.
>
> - Jonathan M Davis

is it probably 5 years for ISO D to happen or more?