Vision for the D language - stabilizing complexity?

[Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d]

On 7/8/2016 2:58 PM, Ola Fosheim Grøstad wrote:
> On Friday, 8 July 2016 at 21:24:04 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
>> On 7/7/2016 5:56 PM, deadalnix wrote:
>>> While this very true, it is clear that most D's complexity doesn't come from
>>> there. D's complexity come for the most part from things being completely
>>> unprincipled and lack of vision.
>>
>> All useful computer languages are unprincipled and complex due to a number of
>> factors:
>
> I think this is a very dangerous assumption. And also not true.

Feel free to post a counterexample. All you need is one!


> What is true is that it is difficult to gain traction if a language does not
> look like a copy of a pre-existing and fairly popular language.

I.e. Reason #2:

"what programmers perceive as logical and intuitive is often neither logical nor 
intuitive to a computer"