Is it time for D 3.0?

[JN]

On Friday, 17 April 2020 at 22:59:43 UTC, Konstantin wrote:
> It can't be used for high frequency trading or other niches 
> where performance is matter, because has dependency on GC in 
> language structure and infrastructure (classes).

Java and Go are used in HFT and other performance sensitive 
areas, and they are much more dependent on GC than D is.

> On my opinion Dlang has features to be popular system and 
> scripting language. It needs not many cool unfinished things, 
> but well implemented. And lang needs development plan with 
> priorities.

D suffers from its own version of "curse of Lisp", which is both 
a blessing and a curse. 
http://winestockwebdesign.com/Essays/Lisp_Curse.html . Read the 
article, especially the Haskell part reminds me of how suddenly D 
wants to be Rust with its borrow checker.

D is very powerful and gives you a lot of choice, but those 
choices come with tradeoffs. Languages like Java or Go don't give 
you a choice when it comes to GC. You either accept the GC and 
use these languages, or you don't accept the GC and go for 
C/C++/Rust. That's one less technical decision to make on every 
project. Also, the paradigms in these languages are more 
consistent. For 99% of Java projects/libraries, you know they 
will be object oriented and you know they will be using GC, 
exceptions and all the stuff, so you can rely on those. Also, the 
standard library provides good foundation libraries, so a library 
might take stdlib objects like InputStream as input and enjoy the 
benefits of interop with other libraries that work with 
inputstreams.

I don't know what to think about D 3.0... obviously everyone has 
their idea what it should look like. Most people seem to opt for 
D 3.0 being an update with a package of breaking changes. But 
then it could also be D 2.100 or something like that.