Vision for the D language - stabilizing complexity?

[H. S. Teoh via Digitalmars-d]

On Sun, Jul 17, 2016 at 02:59:42AM +0000, Nobody via Digitalmars-d wrote:
> On Saturday, 9 July 2016 at 00:14:34 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
> > 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!
> > 
> 
> Perl 6.

Are you serious?  Perl is the *prime* example of "unprincipled and
complex".  Larry Wall himself said (in print, no less):

	English is useful because it is a mess. Since English is a mess,
	it maps well onto the problem space, which is also a mess, which
	we call reality. Similarly, Perl was designed to be a mess,
	though in the nicest of all possible ways. -- Larry Wall


T

-- 
Being able to learn is a great learning; being able to unlearn is a
greater learning.