Long-term evolution of D

[Don Clugston]

Sean Kelly wrote:
> Brian Hay wrote:
>>
>> The specification of the D Programming Language is largely a 
>> one-person effort, albeit with much community input, and I think at 
>> the present time it benefits from this model, given Walter's extensive 
>> language knowledge and compiler implementation experience. But what 
>> happens when D does become the success we all know it can be? Is 
>> standardization (ISO, ECMA etc) an option?
> 
> I've begun to think that the standardization process may simply not be a 
> good fit for software, simply because of how slow it is.  While it's a 
> welcome assurance that a language isn't going to change out from under 
> you, the alternative seems to be that it is unable to keep up with 
> changing requirements.  That said, I would be pleased to eventually see 
> D accepted as some sort of open standard, but perhaps not with the 5-10 
> year cycle apparently required by the ISO process.

I really like the way that dstress is becoming a defacto standard 
compliance test. The standard could be simply be, "must pass all tests 
in dstress", rather than the absurd C++ situation where parts of the 
standard are unimplementable. Defining a standard via tests seems to me 
to be more appropriate to software than the legalese that standards 
bodies inevitably generate.

> 
> 
> Sean