What would a minimal subset of D look like?

[Ola Fosheim Grøstad]

On Saturday, 22 June 2019 at 08:41:36 UTC, Mike Franklin wrote:
> I have a few ideas for removing many features of D, preferring 
> library implementations instead, but base on your preface, I 
> think that is a different goal than what you have in mind.

Btw, I'd love to hear these ideas, my first post gave the wrong 
impression of what I am after.

I am indeed interested in what can be done effectively with meta 
programming library types instead of language features (possibly 
with syntactic sugar if it is frequently used).

I've toyed with my own ideas that would make templated library 
types for array (yes, even arrays), volatile, ownership, 
non-modular integers etc. But nothing serious at this stage.

If there are generally useful patterns that could be done as a 
library then that would be very interesting.

One possible pattern, that is not covered by D, is static 
allocation in memory tight settings. I.e. you have typed 
allocation, but limited to e.g. 256 live objects. So you don't 
get memory fragmentation and out-of-memory issues that can arise 
with malloc.