D adoption prerequisites

[Unknown W. Brackets]

More importantly, whimsical dreams mean nothing against experience. 
What we need is to foray into the things we need - and then build them 
so everyone has them.

But isn't that what programming is (on a grander scale)?

It's true that libraries aren't everything - tools help a bunch too, as 
do whimsical dreams.  But I think libraries drive languages, personally. 
  If I were to use a language other than the one I use now - that's why 
I'd do it... not because of its features or even syntax...

-[Unknown]


Paul Findlay wrote:
>>> Right! We just don't develop these in D (for now). It will be possible,
>>> too,
>>> once needed functionality (cookies, sessions, mysql connections, etc)
>>> gets its way into D Standard Library.
> 
>> Speak for yourself.  I do web-based stuff in D already.
> Exactly. Can I quote someone from the sendero project: "[t]he allure behind
> a framework is that it will accomplish some sort of magic which makes
> developing an application so much easier".
> 
> What I don't get is this, "we just need this and then we will get this
> result" as if adding features to D (language semantics or libraries) is
> deterministic. Already enthusiasts can do whatever they like (even if not
> from scratch, D links to C - and then every language through that torturous
> route :) ) what should be brought to the discussion is what can be done to
> increase the chances of successful development with D (which is
> probabilistic in nature). For me, bringing useful libraries to the table
> like the Tango guys, Christopher E. Miller (with DFL) etc. have done, or
> even half hacked upon work, is much more useful than a laundry list of
> features.
> 
>  - Paul