If D becomes a failure, what's the key reason, do you think?

[kris]

David Medlock wrote:
[snip]
>>> With garbage collection, I just don't see the HUGE benefits of const....
>>
>>
>>
>> And "640KB of RAM should be enough for anyone"
> 
> 
> Not having const is not a limitation- its a semantic addition.  Whether 
> its a feature depends on what you are trying to do.

Au contraire, my friend ~ it can quickly become a /limitation/ on how 
robust one's code actally is. I understand that is not important to some 
people.

[snip]
> HUGE meaning my workflow/productivity increased.  The computers work for 
> us, not the other way around.  If it doesn't make me write programs 
> faster or better, it isn't a feature.

Sure makes debugging a lot simpler, faster, and more deterministic. And 
has similar benefits for long-term maintenance. Those who have limited 
experience with large or long-term projects would have little use for 
this, so I agree with your assessment from that perspective. However, it 
is exactly those large projects which stand to benefit from the use of D 
in one way or another (over C & C++). I sure hope D isn't intended just 
for quick & dirty development?

[snip]
> I know it has uses, but so does anything else.  The difference is 
> whether the cost of acquiring it justifies it(C++ const I mean).

I'm pretty certain nobody here would suggest acquiring C++ const ! :)