What do you want to see for a mature DLang?

[Muld]

On Friday, 29 December 2017 at 21:30:35 UTC, Walter Bright wrote:
> On 12/29/2017 9:29 AM, Adam D. Ruppe wrote:
>> On Friday, 29 December 2017 at 07:53:51 UTC, IM wrote:
>>>    -- Better compiler errors, better compiler errors, better 
>>> compiler errors.
>> 
>> 
>> This is the only thing I greatly care about anymore. Biggest 
>> problem D has in real world use.
>
> This is not actionable. What is actionable is filing bugzilla 
> enhancement requests with specific examples.

Bugzilla is a huge mess tbh, creating a request in bugzilla won't 
lead anywhere. There's so many pointless entries in there people 
have to waste their time looking through just to see what is and 
isn't "actionable" (as you put it). I was thinking of making a 
senseless entry that had some fake example code and see how long 
it would take for the entry to be closed/removed. Something tells 
me it would never be closed/removed.

The barrier for what constitutes a bugzilla entry and why it can 
remain open should be stricter. For example anything that is an 
"enhancement" and would require a DIP should not remain open. 
Bugzilla shouldn't be a "wishlist" for Dlang. This just adds 
needless bloat, what's worse is when an enchantment is not 
labelled that it needs a DIP and someone goes wasting their time 
implementing it.

It's so bad honestly it'd probably be less work just to create a 
new bugzilla and port any relevant entries from the current one.