standardization of D

[BCS]

Sean Kelly wrote:

> The idea of a separate compiler for experimental features has come up in 
> the past and I think it's a good one.  But if it's easier for Walter to 
> maintain a single compiler and provide a feature switch then that seems 
> fine as well.  Also, other review models have been suggested, with the 
> Python approach suggested as one alternative IIRC.  This is ultimately 
> up to Walter however, and the method he feels would be most productive 
> or beneficial to language development.  I can't claim to have any strong 
> feelings here one way or the other.

This could be rolled into the "there is really only one compiler" 
problem and start up a totally new compiler development project. I 
actually am working on this (slowly, vary vary slowly, the lexer works 
but I'm having some UTF-16 convention problems). However my project only 
  addresses the experimental compiler issue because I'm not intending 
mine to be used outside of experimental testing.