Unofficial wish list status.(Jul 2008)

[Walter Bright]

Sean Kelly wrote:
> I think part of the problem is that I simply don't agree with the mixed
> functional / imperative approach that appears to be the overarching
> direction of D.

No other language has tried such an approach before, and so we have yet 
to know unequivocably if it is right or not. But I'm very optimistic 
about it.

> And while I do quite a bit of concurrent programming,
> it's not in a way that will reap any benefit from this design.  In fact, the
> language features added to support it are more of an annoyance than
> they are an aid.  This may very well mean that D is simply not the
> language for me in the long term.  However, with C and C++ as the
> only real alternatives for systems programming, there aren't many
> other options available.

There are several different paradigms for concurrent programming. D 
won't be forcing one paradigm on anyone, it's sort of like oop vs free 
functions. They both work, and you can mix & match them as desired.