It is the year 2020: why should I use / learn D?

[Chris]

On Sunday, 25 November 2018 at 13:04:41 UTC, rikki cattermole 
wrote:
> On 26/11/2018 1:58 AM, Chris wrote:
>> Guess why - and this speaks volumes - Johnathan M. Davis 
>> couldn't be bothered to put dxml through a review process? 
>> Johnathan told us that he wasn't "too enthusiastic" about it. 
>> Why wasn't the new std.xml ever reviewed + accepted back in 
>> the day?
>
> If you're referring to std.experimental.xml, simple it was 
> horrible code that wasn't complete and I did try to improve 
> upon it. It just wasn't good D code. It wouldn't pass the 
> review even if feature complete.

I don't know if it's the same code that was written for 
std.xml(2). But why does it take so long to even reject 
something? Normally you would say "Not good enough" and you'd 
announce that you need a better module (with specs). Or why not 
take Jonathan's stuff (which I understand is very good) and 
integrate it without him having to "push it". Successful 
companies do that. They take promising stuff, clean it up and 
improve it. You cannot wait until a volunteer has got it 
"perfect". It might happen that you have something that's 90% 
there and then it's just binned / abandoned, because the 
volunteer didn't put in the last 10% . And then the volunteer is 
to blame. And maybe the poor volunteer couldn't finish the work, 
because s/he had to wait for feature X to be implemented.