Andrei writes "The Case for D"

[Frits van Bommel]

bearophile wrote:
> grauzone:
>> Just that LDC (why not mention it directly?) is starting to become more 
>> stable than DMD, while the .NET port is in an early alpha stage at best.
> 
> I agree with you, mentioning LDC name there is better. This part of the article is bad.
> And LDC is getting quite stable, I'm using it on Linux with good results.
> I think the main missing parts of LDC (but please correct me if I am wrong) is that is lacks still: exception on Windows, built-in profiler, built-in code coverage. Once those three things are in place then LDC can replace DMD in most situations (I don't know much about the code coverage in LDC, I'll ask on IRC).

In the context of the article it's missing another pretty major feature: actual 
support for pretty much anything new in D2.0...