Thoughts about D

[bpr]

On Wednesday, 29 November 2017 at 16:57:36 UTC, H. S. Teoh wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 28, 2017 at 06:18:20PM -0800, Walter Bright via 
> Digitalmars-d wrote: [...]
>> BetterC is a door-opener for an awful lot of areas D has been 
>> excluded from, and requiring druntime is a barrier for that.
>
> Doesn't this mean that we should rather focus our efforts on 
> improving druntime instead of throwing out the baby with the 
> bathwater with BetterC?

Isn't it possible to do both? For example, make D's GC a precise 
one (thus improving the runtime) and making the experience of 
using D sans GC and runtime a simple one?

In answer to your question, if D is excluded from a lot of areas 
on account of requiring druntime, then it may be that no version 
of what you expect from druntime (I'll use GC as an obvious 
example) will remove that barrier.