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

[Chris]

On Sunday, 14 April 2019 at 12:49:04 UTC, Andre Pany wrote:
> On Sunday, 14 April 2019 at 12:34:12 UTC, Chris wrote:
>
> 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

One example is vibe.d, I used it until roughly a year ago (I had 
used it for years) and I remember the dozens of compiler warnings 
with every new version of dmd. Sönke / vibe.d devs were (and 
still are?) playing catch-up with dmd. See, the more you use 
third party stuff in D the more you have to worry about, it's no 
loner only your own code you have to worry about. What if the 
maintainer doesn't have the time to fix it? You'll be stuck with 
a particular version of dmd and vibe.d or any other third party 
software. This actually makes you think twice if you wanna depend 
on a lib in D. It's a constant gamble as it may hit you any time. 
It doesn't happen to me in other languages, funny that.

Another one is the eternal issue of autodecode - and now there's 
talk of std.v2. Every time I come back to have a look at what's 
going on in D, I think "Thank God I made the switch!" Nowadays I 
spend more time writing new code (= new features = happier users) 
instead of fixing / worrying about old code. D may be a bit more 
stable now, as you say, but we can see autodecode and std.v2 on 
the horizon. The calm before the storm.