C++17

[deadalnix via Digitalmars-d]

On Tuesday, 26 January 2016 at 10:39:03 UTC, Ola Fosheim Grøstad 
wrote:
> On Tuesday, 26 January 2016 at 09:33:22 UTC, deadalnix wrote:
>> No that would be stupid to make that the default as it is 
>> unsafe.
>
> When would you estimate that D could have a production ready 
> default memory managment solution (without GC)?
>

Now, D can do the exact same as C++ .

> When people look at a language they don't ask themselves what 
> is possible, but what the main features are and how convenient 
> it looks.
>

It is in the standard lib, as it is for C++.

> So from a (C/C++) marketing point of view it is better to send 
> the message "excellent memory management with optional GC" than 
> "GC backed memory with optional..."

That's dumb from an engineering point of view.