Reddit: why aren't people using D?

[language_fan]

Wed, 22 Jul 2009 16:20:36 -0700, Walter Bright thusly wrote:

> Jarrett Billingsley wrote:
>> Ha.  Had D differed *too* much from C++, then we'd run the risk of
>> scaring off the C++ snobs simply because it wasn't familiar enough to
>> them.
> 
> It's a good point. Radically different languages tend to fail simply
> because few are willing to expend the effort to learn it. This is why
> Haskell will never catch on.

Do you think it is the syntax or the semantics that is the cause? D is 
getting closer and closer to languages like Haskell. You can fit in many 
of the missing features without a sweat, but some fundamental parts of 
the languages already are contradictory. Some ideas: add tuples, 
algebraic data types, higher order types, existential and universal 
quantification, dynamic types, pattern matching, type classes, monad 
comprehensions, built-in currying, and guards.

Maybe you don't see it as a problem yet, but D seems to suffer from 
serious featuritis; the philosophy seems to be: if some feature is 
implementable but yet unimplemented, it will be implemented. More 
features creep in until the language sinks.

Isn't it too early to state whether Haskell will never catch on? Will D 
ever catch on? Both communities have grown since the births of the 
languages.