Andrei's list of barriers to D adoption

[Walter Bright via Digitalmars-d]

On 6/6/2016 1:15 AM, Russel Winder via Digitalmars-d wrote:
>> * Safety has holes and bugs.
>
> Then so does C, C++ and Rust, so this is just a comment made because it
> can be made and sounds bad. Bad enough to salve the conscience of the
> speaker as to why they are not already using D.

It's pretty clear when they say that, and then continue using C++ which has no 
safety, that safety isn't the real reason.

Reminds me of an anecdote Andrei is tired of. In the 80s, a C++ developer said 
that compilation speed, speed, speed is the most important thing in a C++ 
compiler. This went on until it was pointed out to him that he was using 
Microsoft C++, which was the slowest at compiling by a factor of 4.
Clearly, what was actually most important to him was a name brand compiler 
(social proof), but he needed a more palatable reason, so he just latched on to 
one without much thought.

We have to be careful about being led down the garden path by people who say 
"I'd use your product if only it did X." I have a lot of experience with that, 
and it's very rare that they'll use it if you do X. They'll just respond with 
"yeah, ok, but what I really need is Y." This process never ends. Sometimes it's 
because they're embarrassed by the real reason, sometimes they just take 
pleasure in you dancing to their tune.

Paying attention to our existing users is a much more reliable source of 
information.