What's the current state of D?

[Lutger]

Walter Bright wrote:

> Steve Teale wrote:
>> This is the sort of answer that will kill D. The guy comes back after
>> 2 years, asks a straight question, and get's told "business as usual,
>> we're still arguing among ourselves about what it should be".
>> 
>> Maybe Tiobe is right! Lots of others may not even bother to ask. They
>> just visit the newsgroup, read a page of it, and conclude "same old,
>> same old", and go away.
>> 
>> D should be D, not maybe 1.043, or let's wait a while and see what
>> happens with D2. Potential real users hate uncertainty. If they are
>> going to commit, then D must do so too.
> 
> What bothers me about this sentiment is that every other mainstream
> language undergoes revision, sometimes major ones, but that never seems
> to be an excuse for people to not use it.
> 
> For example, C++ is quite in flux with C++0x.
> 
> The only languages that are not undergoing revision are dead ones.

There are some differences though:

- other mainstream languages release new compilers and features every couple 
of years, you do so every couple of months!

- these other languages go out of their way to make new releases backwards 
compatible, sometimes at great costs. They almost never completely succeed 
though.

To be clear, I do think these are good things for D evolution, but most 
people are wary to invest energy in change. Reflecting back on the 
commitment to D1, I think this was a good move in two ways: it allowed 
larger programs and libraries to rely on it and may have freed the way for 
D2 to incorporate bolder changes.