Is there an intention to 'finish' D2?

[forkit]

On Thursday, 25 November 2021 at 01:49:37 UTC, zjh wrote:
> On Thursday, 25 November 2021 at 01:19:50 UTC, forkit wrote:
>
>> The vision, as I see it (at the moment), can be summed up like 
>> this:
>> D++
>> :-(
>
> How is `D++` bad?
> I like `C++`. It's easy to use.
> It would be nice if we had `D++`.

My concern is that a D++ will for 'compatability reasons' bring  
with it, many of the flaws in C++ - just as C++ bought with it 
many of the flaws in C.

This is where I think, Go got it right (although they made some 
design decisions that I simply refuse to accept).

What we really need is a simpler compiler that we can trust 
(through formal verfication and  proofs). That is how one 
implements @safe and @trusted ;-)

D is already a complex beast (just to learn - nevermind 
implementing a compiler for it)!

And D++...well... whoohoo....hold on tight!