Has D failed? ( unpopular opinion but I think yes )

[Andre Pany]

On Sunday, 14 April 2019 at 12:34:12 UTC, Chris wrote:
> On Sunday, 14 April 2019 at 09:42:01 UTC, Laeeth Isharc wrote:
> [...]
>
>> [...]
>
> That's all good and well and I sincerely congratulate you on 
> your success. But what I see is the following divide: those who 
> say that D works for their business usually use it for very 
> specific purposes with a custom made ecosystem they've built up 
> over the years (as I did too) maybe bound to a particular 
> version of dmd or D1, and it's often for in-house purposes, 
> e.g. analyzing the stock market or optimizing internet ads or 
> machine learning. D is of course a good tool for that kinda 
> stuff (as is Lisp or Scala). But once you have to step out of 
> your biotope things get hairy. Once customers depend on your 
> software directly (as in: installing it directly on a machine, 
> interfacing with it via plug ins or accessing an API on your 
> web server), you're out in the wild with D as far as tooling 
> and stability (breaking changes) are concerned. In other words, 
> D is good for fenced off software that is built for very 
> specific purposes. When it comes to "general purpose", however, 
> it's a different story all together. This is what I'm trying to 
> convey.
>
> [...]

While I would agree with your arguments 5 years ago, I can't 
agree these days. So much happened which made D and its eco 
system usuable from small companies to big companies.

Please provide details where you see the issues, otherwise it is 
impossible to understand what you mean.

Kind regards
Andre