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

[Chris]

On Sunday, 14 April 2019 at 15:10:35 UTC, Julian wrote:

>
> This kind of language is just boring. How about a table?
>
> You can make one in Emacs org-mode very easily:
>
> | D feature          | random? | seems cool | fun? | incomplete?
>           |
> |--------------------+---------+------------+------+------------------------|
> | scope(exit) et al. | ???     | sure       | yes? | where's 
> scope(enter) ? |
> |                    |         |            |      |
>           |
>
> Data's great. You can add to it, explain it, debate it. None
> of the vague impressions posted to this thread are ever even
> answered.

Uh, what is this talk of RefRange all about, partial 
constructors, but no partial destructors? There are so many 
broken features, ... Other languages might be boring when they 
are young, but I prefer stability and sound principles over 
fanciness - and don' forget that those languages also progress 
over the years. It's like building up muscle. The slower you do 
it the longer the muscle will remain strong.